Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethics of materialism
Strengths and weaknesses of dualism and monist materialism
Ethics of materialism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Another point described is of a human person’s soul or make up has a different relationship to the body. The mind informs and than forms of other types of natural substances. As noted above, Aquinas conceives of a rational soul as able to subsist without informing any material body. For human persons, material continuity is not required for the same dualistic soul form to persist.11 The contention that the similarity of mind alone conserves a human person’s identity comes to the fore in Aquinas’s account of bodily resurrection, in which he asserts that the uniqueness of a resurrected human person is “made when the same soul is conjoined to the numerically same body.”12 The characteristics of a resurrected body is affected by nothing other than its being informed by the same soul that informed it before death. This unleashes the potential because a soul is the intellectual and immaterial mind of its body and is that by which the body exists with specific tangible limits creating an individual human person. …show more content…
Substances are those things that have properties; for example, tables and persons are substances that have properties such as being round or six feet tall. Events are particular substances having particular properties at particular time. Material substances, he writes, are those that occupy space; immaterial ones do not. Events and properties may be physical or mental.
“Swinburne defends the view that humans are composed of both a material body and a nonmaterial soul. That is, while humans are composed to some degree by physical parts, for example bones, organs, tissue, and muscle. Swinburne believes that one property of humans consciousness is not identified to a simply physical body. To account for consciousness, he argues, one must posit a soul. Moreover, he argues that the human soul is the product of evolutionary
Since the Medieval time period, philosophers have studied the diverse relationship between the soul and the human body. One philosopher in particular, Aquinas, argued that “the soul is interconnected with the body in such a way that without it, the human person cannot be complete” while Descartes argued that the two functioned independently (Viti 109). The novel, Heart of Darkness, and the book of poems called Native Guard proves Aquinas’ theory to be valid by highlighting the outward effect on the human body of the blurred line between morality and immorality as corruption and greed, two prevalent themes, take over. In both expositions, the weakening of one’s physical body represents the enduring moral struggle of one’s soul.
One of the major Dualistic theory, and one of the first proposed was that of Descartes’ interactive substance dualism. It is the view that says mind and body are separate entities - while the brain is part of the body, which is purely physical; our mind is a mental substance which is an extension of the body - a separate entity. When one experiences pain for example, the body incurs certain chemical and electrical stimuli (physical properties), which results in the self/soul consciously experiencing the felt quality and awareness of the pain (mental property). This is much argued within substance dualism that the soul and the brain interact closely with each other, though they are different substances with different properties. For Dualists, including both Substance and Physical, it seems obvious that physical properties do not have features that mental p...
Elizabeth writes a letter to Descartes asking him to explain to her the relationship “there is between the soul, which is immaterial, and the body, which is material” (Margaret A.: p16). She seeks this clarification particularly on the aspect of how the soul influences the body movements. This question comes following a claim that Descartes had made “regarding the body and the soul” (Gordon B. and Katherine J.: p17 -19). He intimated that the body and the soul exist as single entities and that each has autonomous function. This is found in the philosophy of the dualism.
To put it another way, properties are what make up an object, and substance is what the
In conclusion, Plato and Aristotle present two different conceptions of the soul. By examination of their formulations, and the structure and genre they used, Aristotle's perception of the soul is more convincing. I am more convinced by facts than I am ideals. But his views should not be thrown away, for Aristotle's focus upon the organism as a whole as the proper object of study is a successful approach to the question of the nature of and relationship between mind, body, and soul.
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
Descartian dualism is one of the most long lasting legacies of Rene Descartes’ philosophy. He argues that the mind and body operate as separate entities able to exist without one another. That is, the mind is a thinking, non-extended entity and the body is non-thinking and extended. His belief elicited a debate over the nature of the mind and body that has spanned centuries, a debate that is still vociferously argued today. In this essay, I will try and tackle Descartes claim and come to some conclusion as to whether Descartes is correct to say that the mind and body are distinct.
rity and distinction, but we can conclude what Descartes means. He is saying that we can be sure that these primary qualities exist in bodies in the same way that they do in our ideas of bodies. This cannot be claimed for qualities such as heat, color, taste and smell, of which our ideas are so confused and vague that we must always reserve judgment. This can be seen in the wax example. Do you think that Descartes qualifies to your satisfaction that the mind and body are separate from each other?
Every since Plato introduced the idea of dualism thousands of years ago meta-physicians have been faced with the mind-body problem. Even so Plato idea of dualism did not become a major issue of debate in the philosophical world until the seventeenth century when French philosopher Rene Descartes publicized his ideas concerning the mental and physical world. During this paper, I will analyze the issue of individuation and identity in Descartes’ philosophical view of the mind-body dualism. I will first start by explaining the structure of Cartesian dualism. I will also analyze the challenges of individuation and identity as they interact with Descartes. With a bit of luck, subsequently breaking down Descartes’ reasoning and later on offering my response, I can present wit a high degree of confidence that the problems of individuation and identity offer a hindrance to the Cartesians’ principle of mind-body dualism. I give a critical analysis of these two problems, I will first explain the basis of Descartes’ philosophical views.
...of the body, and no problem arises of how soul and body can be united into a substantial whole: ‘there is no need to investigate whether the soul and the body are one, any more than the wax and the shape, or in general the matter of each thing and that of which it is the matter; for while “one” and “being” are said in many ways, the primary [sense] is actuality’ (De anima 2.1, 12B6–9).Many twentieth-century philosophers have been looking for just such a via media between materialism and dualism, at least for the case of the human mind; and much scholarly attention has gone into asking whether Aristotle’s view can be aligned with one of the modern alternatives, or whether it offers something preferable to any of the modern alternatives, or whether it is so bound up with a falsified Aristotelian science that it must regretfully be dismissed as no longer a live option.
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.
The relationship of the human soul and physical body is a topic that has mystified philosophers, scholars, scientists, and mankind as a whole for centuries. Human beings, who are always concerned about their place as individuals in this world, have attempted to determine the precise nature or state of the physical form. They are concerned for their well-being in this earthly environment, as well as their spiritual well-being; and most have been perturbed by the suggestion that they cannot escape the wrongs they have committed while in their physical bodies.
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.
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.
...have struggled with the nature of human beings, especially with the concept of “self”. What Plato called “soul, Descartes named the “mind”, while Hume used the term “self”. This self, often visible during hardships, is what one can be certain of, whose existence is undoubtable. Descartes’s “I think, therefore I am” concept of transcendental self with just the conscious mind is too simplistic to capture the whole of one’s self. Similarly, the empirical self’s idea of brain in charge of one’s self also shows a narrow perspective. Hume’s bundle theory seeks to provide the distinction by claiming that a self is merely a habitual way of discussing certain perceptions. Although the idea of self is well established, philosophical insight still sees that there is no clear presentation of essential self and thus fails to prove that the true, essential self really exists.