Over the years, many philosophers have tried to answer the elusive mind-body problem. There has been a wide range of approaches to comprehend this matter, but perhaps none as renowned as Cartesian dualism. This theory, proposed by René Descartes in the early seventeenth century, is still central to modern metaphysical discourse. His teachings through the Meditations have been both revered and scrutinized, and still have withstood many other’s attempts to disprove them. One of his biggest critics of the twentieth century was Gilbert Ryle. In his article entitled “Descartes’ Myth,” Ryle profusely attempts to debunk this purported falsehood. However, I would reason that he was not successful in his attempt. In this essay, I will argue how Ryle’s retort to Cartesian dualism is ridiculous and hardly convincing. The basis of my argument lies upon Ryle’s vain assertion that a “category-mistake” was made by Descartes, and also through his use of behaviourism. To begin this analysis, I will first lay out what Cartesian dualism is and what is meant by Ryle in his rebuttal. Following this, I will elaborate on my dispute with Ryle’s accusation of Descartes’ alleged category-mistake. Afterwards, I will debate his use of logical behaviourism, claiming instead that actions do not always define intentions.
René Descartes theorized Cartesian dualism in his legendary works, Meditations II and VI. He argued that the mind and body were two fundamentally distinct substances capable of existing separately. In his view, the mind is an immaterial, indivisible thinking thing, while the body is a material, divisible thing extended in space (Week 3, Lecture 1, Slide 6). He hypothesized that the mind and body were completely separate, but interacted at the...
... middle of paper ...
...controlling his every move, while the puppet represents the vessel through which the puppeteer’s thought processes are carried out. As you say, the mind is but an aspect of the body. So, does the overt behaviour of the puppet indicate all there is to know about the mental processes of the puppeteer? Can all the activities of the mind be inferred by the puppet’s physical motions? The answer to this proposition is a resounding “no.” Thus, when you bandy about your trivial phrase “the Ghost in the Machine” in academic dialogue, remember how your own philosophy has been deduced to being known as “the Man behind the Puppet.”
Works Cited
Johnstone, M., Primmer, J. (2014). [Lecture]. The Mind-Body Problem. PHILOS 1E03, Problems of Philosophy. Hamilton, ON, Canada: McMaster University.
Ryle, G. (2013). Descartes' Myth. Problems of Philosophy: Custom Publishing , 29-35.
Most philosophers in the seventeenth century were offering a response to Descartes’ dualism. In Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy, he presents an argument for a mind-body dualism. Mind-body dualism is a distinction in regard to substance. The mind is a substance completely different than the body. The mind is where thought takes place. Body is extensive substance. According to Descartes, the mind controls the body’s movements and it is also where perception takes place. Elizabeth of Bohemia, a correspondent of Descartes, points out a problem with this mind-body dualism. If it is the case that mind and body are substances of completely different kinds it does not seem possible for the mind to interact with the body. How is it that the mind, being a completely different kind of substance, could come into contact with the body in order to make the body move? This is one problem Cavendish will attempt to resolve in her argument. Cavendish will attempt to reject dualism and argue for a type of monism consisting of animate (thinking) and inanimate (not thinking) matter. Her system can resolve the interaction problem because there would only be one substance. If it is the case that there is only one kind of substance then there could not be an interaction problem because an interaction problem of this sort inherently requires more than one
The general point behind the homunculi-head introduces consideration to the possibility of brain functions being done by parts which could not together be conscious. Functionalism requires only similar machine instructions which serve out a set of outputs given a set of inputs. Block’s counter arguments shows such an account of
The philosophical theory of dualism holds that mind and body are two separate entities. While dualism presupposes that the two ‘substances’ may interact, it contrasts physicalism by refusing to denote correlation between body and mind as proof of identity. Comparing the two theories, dualism’s invulnerable proof of the existence of qualia manages to evade arguments from physicalism. While a common argument against qualia—non-physical properties defined in Jackson’s Knowledge Argument—targets the unsound nature of epiphenomenalism, this claim is not fatal to the theory of dualism as it contains claims of causation and fails to stand resolute to the conceivability of philosophical zombies. This essay argues that epiphenomenalism, while often designated as a weakness when present in an argument, can remain in valid arguments from qualia.
Richard Taylor explained why the body and the mind are one, and why they are not two separate substances. In the article “The Mind as a Function of the Body”, Taylor divides his article in a number of sections and explains clearly why dualism, or the theory that the mind and the body are separate is not conceivable. In one of these sections it is explained in detail the origin of why some philosophers and people believe in dualist metaphysics. As stated by Taylor “when we form an idea of a body or a physical object, what is most likely to come to mind is not some person or animal but something much simpler, such as a stone or a marble”(133). The human has the tendency to believe a physical object as simple, and not containing anything complex. A problem with believing this is that unlike a stone or a marble a human (or an animal) has a brain and the body is composed of living cells (excluding dead skin cells, hair, and nails which are dead cells). The f...
The mind-body problem can be a difficult issue to discuss due to the many opinions and issues that linger. The main issue behind the mind-body problem is the question regarding if us humans are only made up of matter, or a combination of both matter and mind. If we consist of both, how can we justify the interaction between the two? A significant philosophical issue that has been depicted by many, there are many prominent stances on the mind-body problem. I believe property dualism is a strong philosophical position on the mind-body issue, which can be defended through the knowledge argument against physicalism, also refuted through the problems of interaction.
However, Descartes claims that the mind and body have been created separated without good reason. This point is not shown clearly, and further, although I can conceive of my own mind existing independently of my body, it does not necessarily exist as so. On page 56, when Descartes talks about how sailors are related to ships and why the mind body union is different, he is vague on the metaphorical analogy. To try to get his point across, dualism is used.
The desire to avoid dualism has been the driving motive behind much contemporary work on the mind-body problem. Gilbert Ryle made fun of it as the theory of 'the ghost in the machine', and various forms of behaviorism and materialism are designed to show that a place can be found for thoughts, sensations, feelings, and other mental phenomena in a purely physical world. But these theories have trouble accounting for consciousness and its subjective qualia. As the science develops and we discover facts, dualism does not seems likely to be true.
René Descartes laid the foundations for Cartesian Dualism within his Meditations on First Philosophy. Descartes provides most of his dualist view within the second and sixth meditations. Dualism is the belief, or school, within philosophy of mind that the mind and body are separate. Cartesian Dualism, specifically, is essentially substance dualism, which argues that the mind and body are of separate substances, in Descartes’ case, the mind being spiritual and the body being physical. This viewpoint was a common one during Hobbe...
Are minds physical things, or are they nonmaterial? If your beliefs and desires are caused by physical events outside of yourself, how can it be true that you act the way you do of your own free will? Are people genuinely moved by the welfare of others, or is all behavior, in reality, selfish? (Sober 203). These are questions relevant to philosophy of the mind and discussed through a variety of arguments. Two of the most important arguments with this discussion are Cartesian dualism and logical behaviorism, both of which argue the philosophy of the mind in two completely different ways. Robert Lane, a professor at the University of West Georgia, define the two as follows: Cartesian dualism is the theory that the mind and body are two totally different things, capable of existing separately, and logical behaviorism is the theory that our talk about beliefs, desires, and pains is not talk about ghostly or physical inner episodes, but instead about actual and potential patterns of behavior. Understanding of the two arguments is essential to interpret the decision making process; although dualism and behaviorism are prominent arguments for the philosophy of the mind, both have their strengths and weaknesses.
Both Marx and Darwin overturn the notion of mind-body dualism, which is most famously articulated by Rene Descartes. Cartesian dualism rests on the basis that “…the natures of mind and body [are] not only different from one another, but even, in a manner of speaking, are contraries of one another” (Rene Descartes, Synopsis of the Following Six Meditations, 8 - 9). Descartes further posits, “…the mind by its nature is immortal…[because] the idea of God which is in [the mind] must have God himself as its cause” (Descartes, 9). While there are many different variations of mind-body dualism, this essay will remain focused on Cartesian dualism for the purpose of establishing a consistent ground to compare and contrast the respective methodologies of Marx and Darwin in their rejections of Cartesian dualism. Through Marx and Darwin’s refutations of Cartesian dualism, they form an interwoven basis of history and science, upon which humanity is contextualized within the material
In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes states “I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in as far as I am only a thinking and unextended thing, and as, on the other hand, I possess a distinct idea of body, in as far as it is only an extended and unthinking thing”. [1] The concept that the mind is an intangible, thinking entity while the body is a tangible entity not capable of thought is known as Cartesian Dualism. The purpose of this essay is to examine how Descartes tries to prove that the mind or soul is, in its essential nature, entirely distinct from the
While the great philosophical distinction between mind and body in western thought can be traced to the Greeks, it is to the influential work of René Descartes, French mathematician, philosopher, and physiologist, that we owe the first systematic account of the mind/body relationship. As the 19th century progressed, the problem of the relationship of mind to brain became ever more pressing.
In Meditation Six entitled “Concerning the Existence of Material Things, and Real Distinction between the Mind and Body”, one important thing Descartes explores is the relationship between the mind and body. Descartes believes the mind and body are separated and they are two difference substances. He believes this to be clearly and distinctly true which is a Cartesian quality for true knowledge. I, on the other hand, disagree that the mind and body are separate and that the mind can exist without the body. First, I will present Descartes position on mind/body dualism and his proof for such ideas. Secondly, I will discuss why I think his argument is weak and offer my own ideas that dispute his reasoning while I keep in mind how he might dispute my argument.
Descartes is a very well-known philosopher and has influenced much of modern philosophy. He is also commonly held as the father of the mind-body problem, thus any paper covering the major answers of the problem would not be complete without covering his argument. It is in Descartes’ most famous work, Meditations, that he gives his view for dualism. Descartes holds that mind and body are com...
But, “human persons have an ‘inner’ dimension that is just as important as the ‘outer’ embodiment” (Cortez, 71). The “inner” element cannot be wholly explained by the “outer” embodiment, but it does give rise to inimitable facets of the human life, such as human dignity and personal identity. The mind-body problem entails two theories, dualism and physicalism. Dualism contends that distinct mental and physical realms exist, and they both must be taken into account. Its counterpart (weak) physicalism views the human as being completely bodily and physical, encompassing no non-physical, or spiritual, substances.