Descartes Monism And Hedonism

1138 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Problems between religion and science

humans were no more than complex machines operating within a mechanical universe. For this reason, Hobbes was strictly a materialist, or monist, in the belief that the mind was purely a manifestation of chemical processes in the brain. He believed that behavior was not caused by the interactions between the physical body and an immaterial being or soul. Instead, he believed that all human behavior was dictated in accordance to the theory of hedonism which states that all human behavior is driven by the notion of maximizing pleasure and avoiding pain. It is difficult to agree with Hobbes philosophies about human behavior as hedonistic because there has been many arguments throughout history that have question the legitimacy of the theory of …show more content…

In one hand, Descartes was a dualist and supported the idea of a physical body as well as a non-physical mind. On the other Hand, Hobbes was a monist and did not believe in a non-physical mind, only in biochemical processes. Nevertheless, another philosopher attempted to explain the body-mind problem by combining these two opposite arguments. Baruch Spinoza was a Dutch philosopher whose beliefs and ideas caused the church to persecute and exile him. Much like Descartes, Espinoza believed that there was a physical body as well as a non-physical mind. However, unlike Descartes, he believed that these two entities were not separate but that they were similar to two sides of the same coin. What he meant by this is that both the physical body and the non-physical mind occupied the same plane of reality. He explained that God created everything including nature and that human’s physical bodies are part of nature. Thus, because human bodies produce thought and that thought is conscience, or soul, the two are inseparable. What is profound about Spinoza’s ideas is that he essentially combined physiology, philosophy and religion. Espinoza ultimately suffered for these philosophical beliefs because they undermined the church’s anthropomorphic interpretation of God. However, the impact that these notions had were that they gave the church an excuse to preach their religion and claim it as science, ultimately, strengthening the church. Shortly after, there were some members of the church who attempted to solve the body-mind problem by using Descartes ideas and injecting religious dogma; one of these members was Nicolas de Malebranche. Malebranche was a priest who possessed some philosophical ideas about the body-mind problem. Although he largely agreed with Descartes’s dualist position, he disagreed with him on how the two actually interacted. Malebranche believed

Show More
Related

  • Analysis of the Writings of Thomas Hobbes and J.J.C. Smart

    823 Words  | 2 Pages

    that is derived from our helpless selfishness that causes this environment of destruction and constant fear. The reason that Hobbes is separated away from other psychological egoist is in his belief that man has as opportunity to ascend out of the barbarous state of nature to a higher plane of security and society. According to Hobbes this can only happen when the aforementioned “natur...

    Read More

  • Comparing John Locke and Thomas Hobbes

    1242 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hobbes' theory is a pessimistic look at human being and the way they act around each other but Locke's theory suggests that people are more easy-going and peaceful towards each other. Hobbes point of view on human nature and how a government should be run is a more realistic way of looking at things than John Locke?s theory though. Both Hobbes and Locke see human nature differently, Hobbes sees people as being run by selfishness whereas Locke says that people are naturally kind. As we see in the news daily, people are often cruel and inhumane, and we also see kinder people in everyday life. We see people who give up their own personal pleasure so they can serve others. But these people are far and few between, it becomes quickly obvious that humans are drawn towards self-happiness.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    2170 Words  | 5 Pages

    Hobbes’ basic view of nature can be described as cynicism towards how a human is naturally composed. The very nature of his argument is that humans in the state of nature live in a constant state of fear and unhealthy competition. Hobbes goes as far as to use the word anarchic to describe the state of nature, implying that human beings were naturally worried about themselves, so there was no state of order to check this natural desire. A driving reason behind the nature of Hobbes’ contract is because he believed that humans naturally had a “perpetual and restless desire for power after power, that ceaseth only in death”. He claims that part of this perpetual desire is “love of Contention from Competition”, the nature of humans to compare powers and then war over this competitive nature. Another reason he believes his social contract is ideal is that he believes that due to human beings natural want to live the easiest life possible, civil obedience would come naturally. Aside from that reason he believes that the natural and continual insecurity of each man from harm of another man would be a strong enough motive for man to buy into the contract. He states that the egotism from competition leads man in the state of a nature into a war of all men against all men. He called those lives in the state of nature short and barbaric and consisted of little else other than self-sustaining. He then postulated that this state was so horrible and that man y...

    Read More

  • Human Nature as Viewed by Thomas Hobbes and David Hume

    1952 Words  | 4 Pages

    Hobbes views human nature as the war of each man against each man. For Hobbes, the essence of human nature can be found when we consider how man acts apart from any government or order. Hobbes describes the world as “a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man.” (Hobbes mp. 186) In such a world, there are “no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes mp. 186) Hobbes believes that laws are what regulate us from acting in the same way now. He evidences that our nature is this way by citing that we continue to lock our doors for fear of theft or harm. Hobbes gives a good argument which is in line with what we know of survivalism, and evidences his claim well. Hobbes claims that man is never happy in having company, unless that company is utterly dominated. He says, “men have no pleasure, (but on the contrary a great dea...

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Leviathan By Thomas Hobbes

    1147 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes has many different things to say about human nature and what drives men to commit certain actions. All of the actions committed by men and Thomas Hobbes theories revolve around two central ideas, competition and desire. And because of competition and desire, people can never reach true happiness. Man’s own desires and need to be better than the next person will stop true happiness. But in order to understand why Hobbes believes this, his view on human nature has to be looked at first. In Chapter 11 of the Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes places great emphasis on desire. Hobbes says that mankind always does whatever it needs to in order to accomplish its desires. When we accomplish one desire, we simply move on to whatever we want next. The progress that is made in accomplishing one desire and moving on to the next one is what he calls Felicity (Leviathan Ch.11). The reasons that men have desires in the first place are because we have a life style that we love and enjoy. So naturally, humans want to do everything they can in order to keep that lifestyle.

    Read More

  • Cartesian Dualism vs Logical Behaviorism

    1489 Words  | 3 Pages

    René Descartes was the 17th century, French philosopher responsible for many well-known philosophical arguments, such as Cartesian dualism. Briefly discussed previously, according to dualism, brains and the bodies are physical things; the mind, which is a nonphysical object, is distinct from both the brain and from all other body parts (Sober 204). Sober makes a point to note Descartes never denied that there are causal interactions between mental and physical aspects (such as medication healing ailments), and this recognition di...

    Read More

  • Analysis of Descartes’ Mind/Body Distinction

    1172 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Difference Between Functionalism And Dualism

    1533 Words  | 4 Pages

    Hobbes argued that everything in the world, including our thoughts and the states of our minds, can in principle be explained in terms of one thing and one thing only: matter in motion. Thoughts, for example, can be explained, he argued, as matter in motion in the brain. A perception of the world arises in a person’s brain when motion in the external world causes motion in the brain, which is then experienced as an external object, and so on. If everything can be explained as matter in motion, including the mental, then there is no good reason to suppose mind and matter are two fundamentally different kinds of things. Rather, it is more reasonable to suppose that if everything can be explained in material terms then everything is material. So argued

    Read More

  • Civil War In Thomas Hobbes Leviathan

    1805 Words  | 4 Pages

    His first assumption is that people are physically and mentally similar to one another, and this similarity means that “no individual has the capacity to overpower or influence another” (Hobbes). A flaw, however, that I realize in this assertion is that there do exist in society persons of deficient physical and mental ability. For example, people with severe physical or mental handicaps would not fare well in Hobbes’ state of nature because they would be easily dominated. Hobbes’ second assumption is that people generally want to protect their own lives, “shun[ning] death” (Hobbes). This proclivity for self-preservation does not translate to an innate malevolent nature of humans; however, it does imply that humans tend to be more indifferent towards each other than benevolent. I tend to agree with this second assumption because in my experience, individuals think of themselves in an elevated manner, and if someone does not agree with this view, the individual becomes offended. Individuals tend to judge others based on swift observations, dismissing others if they do not align with one’s personal preferences. The final assumption Hobbes asserts is that individuals have a penchant for religion. This penchant stems from the curious and anxious nature of individuals. Hobbes thinks that these aspects of human nature cause individuals to “seek out religious beliefs” (Hobbes) in order to quell the curiosity and anxiety that dominates their lives. In addition to these various normative assumptions regarding the state of nature, Hobbes outlines the right of nature, which is “a liberty right to preserve the individual in the state of nature” (Hobbes). In essence, this

    Read More

  • René Descartes and Thomas Hobbes

    1496 Words  | 3 Pages

    During the sixteen hundreds, the French philosopher René Descartes laid the foundations for the beginnings of Cartesian Dualism. In contrast, the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes argued against dualism in favor of materialism. Recently, Cartesian Dualism, and dualism in general has fallen out of favor as materialism arose as a more plausible and explanatory theory regarding the interrelationships between body and mind. The translation Descartes’ writing in the Meditations is far more cryptic than Hobbes’ writing in the Leviathan. Making it far easier to see Hobbes’ claims. Hobbes provides a reasonable explanation against dualism in his objections to Descartes, and in his Leviathan, provides background upon his reasoning in those objections. Dualism may be less popular than materialism in current philosophy, but it may simply be because dualism has more or less reached some sort of block in regards to its further development, and not anything to do with the writings of Descartes or Hobbes. Descartes and Hobbes may have influenced many of the earlier bickering between philosophers of mind upon the subject of mind-body interaction, as Hobbes was likely the first objector to Descartes’ dualism.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan

    1044 Words  | 3 Pages

    He claims that acts of kindness, charity and benevolence are always actions that the performer believes will result in a beneficial consequence for himself. Hobbes’ basis for this argument lies in the concept of reason. He writes that human beings are logical creatures and unlike other animals, use reason to make all of their decisions (Leviathan 2, 17). A law dictated by reason that will benefit a man is called a law of nature. Hobbes lists three fundamental laws of nature that promote the primary motivation of men, which is self-preservation.

    Read More

  • Hobbes' View of Human Nature and his Vision of Government

    446 Words  | 1 Pages

    Hobbes believed that human beings naturally desire the power to live well and that they will never be satisfied with the power they have without acquiring more power.  After this, he believes, there usually succeeds a new desire such as fame and glory, ease and sensual pleasure or admiration from others.  He also believed that all people are created equally.  That everyone is equally capable of killing each other because although one man may be stronger than another, the weaker may be compensated for by his intellect or some other individual aspect. Hobbes believed that the nature of humanity leads people to seek power.  He said that when two or more people want the same thing, they become enemies and attempt to destroy each other.  He called this time when men oppose each other war.  He said that there were three basic causes for war, competition, distrust and glory.  In each of these cases, men use violence to invade their enemies territory either for their personal gain, their safety or for glory.  He said that without a common power to unite the people, they would be in a war of every man against every man as long as the will to fight is known.  He believed that this state of war was the natural state of human beings and that harmony among human beings is artificial because it is based on an agreement.  If a group of people had something in common such as a common interest or a common goal, they would not be at war and united they would be more powerful against those who would seek to destroy them.  One thing he noted that was consistent in all men was their interest in self-preservation.

    Read More

  • Descartes’, Spinoza’s, and Leibniz’s Response to the Mind-Body Problem

    2994 Words  | 6 Pages

    Since Descartes many philosophers have discussed the problem of interaction between the mind and body. Philosophers have given rise to a variety of different answers to this question all with their own merits and flaws. These answers vary quite a lot. There is the idea of total separation between mind and body, championed by Descartes, which has come to be known as “Cartesian Dualism”. This, of course, gave rise to one of the many major responses to the mind-body problem which is the exact opposite of dualism; monism. Monism is the idea that mind and body one and the same thing and therefore have no need for interaction. Another major response to the problem is that given by Leibniz, more commonly known as pre-ordained harmony or monadology. Pre-ordained harmony simply states that everything that happens, happens because God ordained it to. Given the wide array of responses to the mind-body problem I will only cover those given by Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz. I will also strive to show how each of these philosophers discuss what mind and body are and how each accounts for God’s influence on the interaction of mind and body, as this is an interesting distinction between them, as well as the important question of the role of substance. This is important, I believe, because it helps to understand the dialogue between the three philosophers.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes and the Realist School

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hobbes was a strong believer in the thought that human nature was evil. He believed that “only the unlimited power of a sovereign could contain human passions that disrupt the social order and threatened civilized life.” Hobbes believed that human nature was a force that would lead to a constant state of war if it was not controlled. In his work the Leviathan, he laid out a secular political statement in which he stated the significance of absolutism.

    Read More

  • Descartes: Relationship Between Mind and Body

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

More about Descartes Monism And Hedonism

Open Document