More handpicked essays just for you.
Interrelationships between science and religion
Interrelationships between science and religion
Tension between religion and science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Mind-Brain Problem Concerning Dualism and Materialism
I am faced with the philosophical task of defending either dualism or materialism, depending on which one is most attractive to me. So either I support the theory of dualism, which is the belief that there is both a physical and a spiritual state, or I believe in materialism, which is the belief that everything that exists is material or physical. Although I believe materialism to be easier to prove, I find dualism more attractive to believe. Throughout the following, I will attempt to build a case for the theory of dualism giving insights both documented and personal. I will also shed light on the theory of materialism and the proofs that support this theory; showing that although materialism has a strong argument, essentially, it the less attractive of the two.
What I find most appealing about dualism is the belief in the soul and body, spirit and matter. Although materialism is a valid theory scientifically and philosophically, I find dualism to cover a wider spectrum of possibilities. I do not believe that our body and our thoughts and everything that surrounds us are a result of the physical. Materialism removes any problems of relatedness between mind and body by eliminating the spiritual altogether. But as I will show, materialism might have the upper hand in proof but it cannot fulfill or support my need for the spiritual like dualism can.
Dualism supports the possibility that when a person dies, their body might die but their soul continues. It allows one to at least consider this notion along with many others of the spiritual realm. The existence of God, miracles, and unexplained phenomena are just a few things dualism supports...
... middle of paper ...
...gh the previous three arguments, then materialism violates Leibniz's Law.
From an objective point of view I can see how someone would believe in materialism, but for me, dualism has so much more to offer. Dualism might not hold up as well scientifically as materialism, but to me it holds up better spiritually. So, obviously it is easy for a materialist to rule out dualism based on scientific knowledge. More than likely because he or she is looking solely at the physical and not even giving thought to the spiritual because materialism has ruled out this possibility. I guess I can see that if you accept the premise that everything that exists is material then there really is no validity to considering the spiritual. But to me, my life makes more sense if there is something to consider beyond the material because so much of my life revolves around the spiritual.
When addressing the mind and body issue, there are often multiple explanations. Out of those multiple explanations, Dualism and Materialism are the ones to stick out. Dualism stands on the ground that the mind and body are two fundamentally different things. There is in no way that you can make a distinction between the two. For no one can explain how a non-physical entity can affect a physical body. On the other hand Materialism (aka physicalism) stands the ground that there is only one entity in the world, which has to be physical. That everything in the universe has meaning in physical terms, for the brain is the mind.
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.
Two of the most fundamental parts within the Cartesian dualism argument are both the conceivability argument, and also the divisibility argument. Both arguments aim to show that the mind (thinking things) and body (extensions) are separate substances, both of which arguments can be found within Meditation VI. Within this essay, I shall introduce both arguments, and critically assess the credibility of both, discovering whether they can be seen as sound arguments, or flawed due to incorrect premises or logical fallacies.
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.
This paper aims to endorse physicalism over dualism by means of Smart’s concept of identity theory. Smart’s article Sensations and the Brain provides a strong argument for identity theory and accounts for many of it primary objections. Here I plan to first discuss the main arguments for physicalism over dualism, then more specific arguments for identity theory, and finish with further criticisms of identity theory.
Dualism claims that the mind is a distinct nonphysical thing, a complete entity that is independent of any physical body to which it is temporarily attached. Any mental states and activities, as well as physical ones, originate from this unique entity. Dualism states that the real essence of a person has nothing to do with his physical body, but rather from the distinct nonphysical entity of the mind. The mind is in constant interaction with the body. The body's sense organs create experiences in the mind. The desires and decisions of the mind cause the body to act in certain ways. This is what makes each mind's body its own.
This paper will discuss the dualism’s Divisibility Argument. This argument relies on Leibniz’s Law and uses a different property to prove the distinctness of brain states of mental states. Mary, who is a materialist, presents several objections to that argument. Her main objection corresponds to the first/third-person approach. She believes that Dave presents that argument only from the first-person approach, which is introspection, and totally disregards the third-person approach, which is observation of another mind. Mary’s objections will follow by the Dave’s response on them from the dualist’s point of view.
To try to explain Dualism through God, we must talk about corporeal bodies and our knowledge of them. Regarding the nature of corporeal bodies and what is known about them and given Descartes premises, the conclusions he draws in Meditation Six are generally the correct ones. He again invokes the causal to argue that the ideas...
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.
(Friedenbreg & Silverman, 2012, p. 28) Basically, there is a physical and a spiritual domain where two opposite pairs can exist in either domain. (Friedenbreg & Silverman, 2012, p. 28) According to substance dualism, the actual material used create the mind and body is not made out of the same substances. (Friedenbreg & Silverman, 2012, p. 29) Property dualism is distinguished from the mind and body to have different characteristics of one another but are composed of the same substances. (Friedenbreg & Silverman, 2012, p. 29) Cartesian dualism is described as if one is being controlled by something. For instance, our mind and body being controlled by a remote control. (Lowe, 2000, p. 21) In conclusion, keeping all the perspectives in mind, I believe I fall under the category of a substance and a property dualism due to my personal experiences and
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...
For centuries philosophers have debated on monism and dualism, two different philosophical views of the human person. Philosophers have been trying to decipher whether the person is made up of the mind, the body, or both. Monists hold the belief that existence is purely based upon one ultimate “category of being” this means that either the person is made up of only the body or only the mind (Morris p155). Dualists hold the belief that existence is based upon the body as well as the mind and its mental properties (Morris p155).
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.