Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Difference between aristotle and plato views
Difference between aristotle and plato views
Aristotle and platos views
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Difference between aristotle and plato views
The Mind and the Physical Body
Since the times of Plato and Aristotle, the argument of dualism and mutualism of the mind and body has been in existence. Dualism has been the driving force behind the existence of the mind/body problem and has been by far the majority view due largely to the influence of Descartes. In recent times, modern medicine has taken a shift towards mutualism. Outside stimuli, as perceived by the mind, affects the body either beneficially or adversely. While the body as an organism has the capacity to heal, evidence proves that the mind expedites recovery. The mind and body are one. Evidence of this mutualism exists in Divakaruni's "What the Body Knows." This story shows that the condition of the mind is a pertinent necessity in recovery of the physical person. - In the story Aparna gives birth to a son by cesarean section. She is mutilated in a sense; however, the pain is overpowered by the good in bringing life into the world. What turns into a healthy state of mind soon turns sour by experience. The pain continues and within a short period of time she ends up back in the hospital with complications. She awakes in the same room feeling the loss of her baby not being near but also losing to the pain. The multiples of negative stimuli have begun. Aparna spends a period of time being poked and prodded by the medical staff while they figure out what to do. She periodically hears the congenial claps and hurrahs as other women leave the ward. What was once a festive occasion turns negative in her perception. She feels like the medical staff is giving her a lot of lip service. Though all are perceptions in attitude, Aparna is too angry and upset to see any positive ou...
... middle of paper ...
... As Aparna progresses, Dr. Michaels begins to wean her with the reintroduction of her baby. Slowly her priorities begin to focus on her baby and her husband Umesh. With her recovery in progress, Aparna leaves with the claps and hurrahs from the nurses taking on a different more positive meaning. The mind and body had both healed. - - Alternative medicine has come into it's own in the last decade. People are realizing the mutual benefits that the mind has on the body. Professionals in the medical field are beginning to reinforce the mind body prescription as an addition to their traditional applications. They note that positive affects of the mind aid in recovery. Though the ideal is old to man, the practicality of using the mind body prescription with traditional medicine has proven to be a major asset; as in the case of Aparna.
Ross defines and differentiates between the terms healing and curing. She recognizes the fact that healing and curing are very intertwined and it can be hard to distinguish between the two terms. There are differences between the definitions in scholarly and general settings. She references an ethnographic study of healing versus curing conducted by anthropologists Andrew Strathern and Pamela Stewart in 1999 with native groups in New Guinea. The results of the study looked at how energy used by the different types of tribal healers to either cure or heal a patient. Eastern medicine focuses on how energy interacts with the healing process in connection within the mind. Whereas Western medicine is focused on the mind and the body separately. The practice is considered a holistic approach to finding cures. According to Ross (2013), healing is more a therapeutic process targeting the whole body and specific illness including emotional, mental, and social aspects in the treatment. The act of curing is a pragmatic approach that focuses on removing the problem all together. The life experiences of a person playing into how well certain treatments will heal or cure what is ailing them. These aspects can not be defined with textbook definitions. The interaction that the healing process has with energy is a variable in the success rate. Uncontrolled emotions can have a greater impact on the inside the body than a person can realize. The exploration of energy interaction within the body can be used for greater analysis of health care systems. (21-22). Are Western healthcare facilities purposely “curing” patients just so that they return are few years later? Is Western Medicine built upon a negative feedback loop? The terminolo...
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.
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...
In the reading by Richard Swinburne, he evaluates the mortality of the soul and its interaction with the human body. His position is best described as attributing the soul to a light bulb, and the brain to a functioning socket:
Mathews, Holly F. "Introduction: A Regional Approach and Multidisciplinary Persepctive." Herbal and Magical Medicine: Traditional Healing Today. Ed. James Kirkland, Holly F. Mathews, C. W. Sullivan, III, and Karen Baldwin. Durham: Duke UP, 1992. 1-13. Print.
Evaluate the argument that Descartes makes based on clear and distinct perception for the distinction between mind and body
The nature of mind and body has been debated constantly, but the answer has always been present in our own minds. In Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities, two extremely different characters, Sydney Carton and Charles Darnay, are presented, and much quarreling has arisen over their being representative of the clash of the mind and the body, and if so, which is which. Sydney Carton is symbolic of the mind and Charles Darnay of the body. The mind, Carton, and the body, Darnay, are one being who react to situations adversely; but where the body is physical, the mind is philosophical, and the mind gives life to the body.
...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.
History of the Mind-Body Connection. The concept of the interconnection between the brain and body has been around for quite a while. Ancient healing practices, such as Traditional Chinese Medicine and Ayurvedic medicine, emphasized important links between the mind and body. Hippocrates once wrote: "The natural healing force within each one of us is the greatest force in getting well." This statement reflects the belief of ancient philosophers that emotions and health are deeply connected. In later centuries, however, this belief was cast aside.
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.
Many of our finest researchers and scientists have explored that question, and while the exact answer still eludes us, the facts seem to bear out that the mind does have the power to assist in both healing, and conversely, bringing on "disease" as well. Two such examples of mind and body healing are hypnotherapy and meditation. There are others such as ionization, which focuses on thinking positive instead of negative.
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.