Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Descartes mind body
Descartes mind body
Essays on descartes philosophy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Descartes mind body
For thousands of years, the nature of human intelligence has been debated, discussed and examined. Descartes’ argument that it is not bodies that think, but an immaterial substance that exists non-spatially is problematic because it vies thinking from a flawed, incomplete understanding of the human brain and its functions. Descartes would defend his claim by arguing that the thinking soul connects to the body through the brain, and while influenced by the states of the brain, exists outside of our bodies, however that would still be ignoring years of study and scientific evidence exploring the brain. The argument that the soul is what thinks, and would therefore makes artificial intelligence impossible is highly flawed. Summary Human bodies …show more content…
One primary concern is our perceptions of physical objects, which according to Descartes, exist in the immaterial. He reasons that all knowledge or experience of the world exists first in the mind, and that all physical experiences prove the mind’s existence. While an experience may have been false, such as a dream, the experience of the mind did surely exist, further proving the existence of the mind, separate of the physical world. (Descartes, 1983, p. 7) Descartes reasons that all things other than one’s own mind can be doubted, even God, and that thinking is the only thing that can be known to …show more content…
These are substantial deficiencies, and leave many questions unanswered, or even acknowledged. Any defense or response to objections will ultimately revolve around Descartes’ main views, without being fully able to address concerns. Descartes’ views on intelligence revolve around an immaterial soul that connects to the body and thinks, feels, and perceives. He offers no real evidence for this view, aside from his own logic, and often uses the existence of God to fill in holes in his logic. I reject the argument that immaterial souls are responsible for thought. Even if I were to accept that as being true, I would reject the implication that an artificial intelligence could not think because of a lack of a
In constructing his argument for God's existence, Descartes analyzes several aspects of the nature of human thought. He begins by outlining the various types of thoughts we have, which include ideas, thoughts, volitions and judgments. Ideas, or images of ideas can only exist within the mind and are certain of existence. Volitions, or choices are firmly within the mind and are also certain. Emotions, such as love, fear, hate, all exist in the mind and are certain as well. Judgments involve reference to effects outside the mind and are subject to doubt. Therefore, judgments are not certain and distinct. Descartes believes that images, volitions, and emotions are never false but it is our judg...
Descartes' error, Antonio Damasio tells us, was his belief in "the abyssal separation between body and mind . . . " (250). As Damasio notes, there are certainly many specific "errors" in Descartes' writings--that heat causes the circulation of the blood, for example, or that movement is translated instantaneously through the plenum from one object to another--but all these notions have been "corrected" by subsequent theory in ways that we can imagine Descartes himself might easily accept. The "abyssal separation" persists as the central cliché of modern philosophy because we do not yet agree on a solution, and Descartes serves as the convenient scapegoat for those who want to argue for the reduction of mind to matter. Damasio himself is part of a new generation of neuroscientists who, using the framework of connectionism or neural network theory, think they posses a solution to the mind/body [End Page 943] problem. The actual object of his attack is thus not so much Descartes but those cognitive psychologists who have defined themselves in terms of a Cartesian "nativism" or doctrine of innate elements of knowledge not derived from sensation. None of these "nativists" literally believes in mind/ body dualism, but insofar as they cling to the central functionalist dogma that mind can be instantiated in any physical system they de facto treat mind as something that can be considered apart from embodiment, and they embrace, more or less, an overtly Cartesian methodology, which Jerry Fodor has called "methodological solipsism." 1
According to Descartes, “because our senses sometimes deceive us, I wanted to suppose that nothing was exactly as they led us to imagine (Descartes 18).” In order to extinguish his uncertainty and find incontrovertible truth, he chooses to “raze everything to the ground and begin again from the original foundations (Descartes 59).” This foundation, which Descartes is certain to be the absolute truth, is “I think, therefore I am (Descartes 18).” Descartes argues that truth and proof of reality lies in the human mind, rather than the senses. In other words, he claims that the existence of material objects are not based on the senses because of human imperfection. In fact, he argues that humans, similarly to Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, are incapable of sensing the true essence or existence of material objects. However, what makes an object real is human thought and the idea of that object, thus paving the way for Descartes’ proof of God’s existence. Because the senses are easily deceived and because Descartes understands that the senses can be deceived, Descartes is aware of his own imperfection. He
Unlike one of empiricism’s major tenets, Tabula Rasa, or blank slate, Descartes believed that the mind was not a blank slate, but actually came pre-loaded, if you will, with ideas, which are part of our rational nature and that our rational nature allows us to grasp . Descartes begins his journey deep within his own mind by claiming that all truths can be conceived by thinking about them. He calls his method cogito or pure reasoning. His famous words “I think, therefore I am,” describes the way that he thinks the mind is the true reality with the rest of reality being an extension. His example to prove thi...
In defining mind and matter, Descartes is simultaneously equating the mind with the soul whilst proving it to be distinct from the body and matter. Many philosophers of mind have attempted to address the mind-body problem, proving the relationship between the above two elements. Famously addressed by Descartes, he explored the relationship between consciousness and the brain as he provided several arguments in defence to his stance to the explanation of the union between the mind (or soul) and the body. One of which is the argument from indivisibility:
If Descartes firstly has the premise of the existence of think, maybe it would be more complete. We know, according to Descartes’s statement, the thought is inseparable from us, is a part of us. So when we think, and thinking do exist, we can prove the existence of ourselves. So the following argument maybe better for me:
Second, Descartes raised a more systematic method for doubting the legitimacy of all sensory perception. Since my most vivid dreams are internally indistinguishible from waking experience, he argued, it is possible that everything I now "perceive" to be part of the physical world outside me is in fact nothing more than a fanciful fabrication of my own imagination. On this supposition, it is possible to doubt that any physical thing really exists, that there is an external world at all. (Med. I)
Descartes makes a careful examination of what is involved in the recognition of a specific physical object, like a piece of wax. By first describing the wax in a manner such that “everything is present in the wax that appears needed to enable a body to be known as distinctly as possible” (67), he shows how easily our senses help to conceive our perception of the body. But even if such attributes are modified or removed, we still recognize the changed form, as the same piece of wax. This validates Descartes’ claim that “wax itself never really is the sweetness of the honey, nor the fragrance of the flowers, nor the whiteness, nor the shape, nor the sound” (67), and the only certain knowledge we gain of the wax is that “it is something extended, flexible, and mutable” (67). This conclusion forces us to realize that it is difficult to understand the true nature of the wax, and its identity is indistinguishable from other things that have the same qualities as the wax. After confirming the nature of a human mind is “a thinking thing” (65), Descartes continues that the nature of human mind is better known than the nature of the body.
many different results. Overall, I believe that there are some areas of Descartes’ position that
Descartes’ first two Meditations are arguably the most widely known philosophical works. Because of this, one can make the error of assuming that Descartes’ method of doubt is self-evident and that its philosophical implications are relatively minor. However, to assume this would be a grave mistake. In this paper, I hope to spread light on exactly what Descartes’ method of doubt is, and how, though it furnishes challenges for the acceptance of the reality of the external world, it nonetheless does not lead to external world skepticism.
Rene Descartes decision to shatter the molds of traditional thinking is still talked about today. He is regarded as an influential abstract thinker; and some of his main ideas are still talked about by philosophers all over the world. While he wrote the "Meditations", he secluded himself from the outside world for a length of time, basically tore up his conventional thinking; and tried to come to some conclusion as to what was actually true and existing. In order to show that the sciences rest on firm foundations and that these foundations lay in the mind and not the senses, Descartes must begin by bringing into doubt all the beliefs that come to him by the senses. This is done in the first of six different steps that he named "Meditations" because of the state of mind he was in while he was contemplating all these different ideas. His six meditations are "One:Concerning those things that can be called into doubt", "Two:Concerning the Nature of the Human mind: that it is better known than the Body", "Three: Concerning God, that he exists", "Four: Concerning the True and the False", "Five: Concerning the Essence of Material things, and again concerning God, that he exists" and finally "Six: Concerning the Existence of Material things, and the real distinction between Mind and Body". Although all of these meditations are relevant and necessary to understand the complete work as a whole, the focus of this paper will be the first meditation.
...he Soul and the existence of God are not only unreliable but weak and inconsistent. Descartes fell victim to a circular argument concerning where the ability for humans to clearly perceive and reason, mistakenly tried to reconcile science and religion in terms of mind/body dualism, and he rejected all empirical knowledge. The philosophy of Descartes possibly had good intentions but failed time and again. If Descartes had doubted less about his mind and his existence and tried to experience more of what the physical world had to offer, his philosophy would have proven to be more adequate and universal.
The teaching of Descartes has influenced many minds since his writings. Descartes' belief that clear and distinct perceptions come from the intellect and not the senses was critical to his ultimate goal in Meditations on First Philosophy, for now he has successfully created a foundation of true and certain facts on which to base a sold, scientific belief structure. He has proven himself to exist in some form, to think and therefore feel, and explains how he knows objects or concepts to be real.
...ning of mind is something that cannot be divisible but that is hard to see because I have already proved that by my understanding of the mind it has parts. It is also hard to think of a mind or soul that does not have such things as memory and personality therefore I believe Descartes argument is false.
In Rene Descartes Discourse on Method he discusses the nature of animals. Descartes acknowledges the fact that animals are very similar to human beings, as humans and animals have the same basic design and same organs. Descartes realizes that human and animals have similar bodies but claims that animals are nothing more than bodies. He claims that animals are purely just mechanical. He argues the functions of the body are machine like as the heart, lungs, and muscles are seen to be parts of the machine. Descartes differs human beings from animals by saying that humans have souls while animals are no more than just bodies with no soul. He claims that animals are nothing more than pure machines, and believes that they have no emotions or desires. “But rather that they no intelligence at all, and that it is nature that acts in them, according to the disposition of their organs, just as we see that a clock composed exclusively of wheels and springs can count the hours and measure time more accurately than we can with all our carefulness.” (Descartes 33) Descartes sees the soul as something extra that God had gifted human beings as he sees animals without souls, personalities, desires emotions, and rational intelligence. He claims the God only gifted rational souls to human beings.