AQA Philosophy- self, death & afterlife

what does Plato believe about the nature of the soul

what does Plato believe about the nature of the soul

dualist

• mind and body are seperate but are linked in some way

• when the body dies the soul survives

what is the world of forms

a world of metaphysical perfection

the soul belongs to the world of forms
they came down to live in bodies in this world
when we die they return to the world of forms

quote from old Christian prayer to support world of Forms

“go forth upon your journey from this world, O christian soul”

what 3 parts does Plato believe the soul is made from

logical part, spirited part, appetitve part

main criticism of Plato’s belief of the soul

no good evidence to support that there is a world of forms

what is monism

the soul and the body can’t be seperated just as the shape of a seal can’t be seperated from wax

3 types of monism

physicalism, functionalism (type of physicalism), materialism

what is materialism, which scholar believes it + 2 quotes

all processes of human life are physical, life ends at death

Dawkins: “life is just bytes and bytes of information” “the body is a computer made of meat”

what is physicalism

there is no body/soul relationship

just as water reduces to H2O, mind reduces brain

what does Aristotle believe about the nature of the soul

monist

• the soul gave body anima (life) but didn’t survive after death

• started the scientific rational view: all living things have souls but humans have the ability to have rational thoughts as well as a psyche

quote from Aristotle about the nature of the soul

“to attain any… knowledge about the soul is one of the most difficult things in the world”

what does descartes believe about the nature of the soul

substance dualist

• there is soul and matter, mind exists independently from the body

Descartes differences between the mind and body

body= res extensa (extented substance), mortal
mind= res cognita (mental substance), immortal

what are Descartes 3 proofs that the soul is seperate from the body

1. argument from doubt

2. argument from divisibility and non divisibilty

3. argument from conceivability

outline the argument from doubt + quote

“cogito ergo sum”

• i can doubt my body exists

• but i can’t doubt that i exist as a thinking being because doubt is a form of thinking

• therefore the mind and body aren’t identical

outline the argument from divisibility and non divisibilty + quote

“the body by its nature is always divisible, while the mind is… indivisible”

• uses Lebaniz’s law of identity: 2 things are the same if they always share the same properties

• all bodies are extended in space since they’re 3D (can be divisible)

• the mind isn’t extended in space (not divisible)

• therefore the mind is radically different from the body

neuroscience criticism to argument from divisibility and non-divisibility

theres a close correlation between mind and brain, when the brain is damaged the mind can be too

Locke’s criticism to argument from divisibility and non-divisibility

awareness is divisible because there’s times were unconscious, more aware, and less aware

counters to Locke’s criticism

the mind has both conscious and unconscious thoughts and Locke is only describing the conscious mind

dualists argue that the soul always thinks but memory fails to remember those thoughts when we’re asleep

general counter to dualism

the self may be an illusion: theres a process of thinking but not a seperate ‘I’ who thinks (we can’t define what ‘I’ is)

outline the argument from conceivability

whatever i can conceive as 2 different things can be created by God as 2 different things

• i can conceive of myself as a non-extended thinking thing (mind)

• i can conceive of myself as an extended thinking thing (body)

• the mind and the body exists apart from each other

Ryle’s criticism to argument from concievability

the masked man fallacy

• you can conceive Batman as a caped superhero

• you can conceive Bruce Wayne as a billionare who isn’t a caped superhero

• therefore Batman isn’t Bruce Wayne but this isn’t true

just because Descartes can conceive the mind exists without the body doesn’t mean its true

what does Descartes believe about the soul and body relationship

interactionism

body and soul are connected through the pineal gland in the brain

2 main counters to interactionism

theres objective, scientific evidence for the function of the pineal gland (produces melatonin)

interactionism doesn’t tell us anything about how the soul and body are different

Ryle’s criticism of interactionism + quote

Descartes soul/body relationship is ‘the ghost in the machine’
he says that since the mind isn’t physical it must be non-physical but it may just not exist

• he makes a category mistake: “it is one big mistake and a mistake of a special kind”

• eg: visiting a uni, someone goes to lots of libraries and asks where the uni is but uni is term for another category not just individual libraries

mind is an an umbrella term for all behavioural dispositions

functionalist criticism of interactionism + scholar example

there is no soul
nothing can be separate from the brain, the mind is like a computer processing information and generates responses

Puttman: brain in a vat, we don’t need to have a body if you can use electrical stimuli to replicate feelings/emotions

Blackmore example functionalism

she had an out of body experience and found no empirical evidence to suggest why, therefore out of body experiences are the product of the mind

Chalmer (religious) counter to functionalism and criticisms of interactionism

doesn’t solve the hard problem of consciousness

doesn’t explain what consciousness actually is and we all have unique qualia (subjective sensations)

what do dual-aspect monists believe about the soul and body relationship

mind and brain are 2 aspects of the same substance which is why we experience them as different things

brain= physical and visible

mind= isn’t physical and contains qualia (subjective consciousness)

2 strengths of dual-aspect monism

1. avoids main problem of interactionism: explains how separate mental and physical substances can interact (there’s no separate substances)

2. supported by quantum theory: the mind and brain are complimentary aspects of one psycho-physical reality just like light can be both electrons and waves

weakness of dual-aspect monism

doesn’t fit in with some religious beliefs about the afterlife because it doesn’t say the soul survives the death of the body

Plutarch example of continuing personal existence after death

replaces parts of a ship over time, is it still the same ship? are we still the same person when we get older/die

what would physicalists/materialist believe about personal existence after death

there isn’t any
personal identity is linked to the body, the body dies at death and person can’t live without their body

what does Russel believe about personal existence after death + 2 quotes

• the mind, self-awareness, and consciousness is a projection of the brain

• the ‘I’ dies when your brain dies

“the brain… is dissolved at death” “its rational to suppose that mental life ceases when bodily life ceases”

what does Flew believe about personal existence after death

we can’t talk about personal existence after death meaningfully because ‘surviving death’ is contradictory & there’s no empirical evidence to falsify life after death

what does Aquinas believe about personal existence after death

beatific vision

• the soul is lacking its fullness and in the afterlife God will give it a glorified body so that there can be direct communication between humans and God

personal existence can happen after death

what is Hick’s replica theory

thought experiment to show that if there is an omnipotent God that we could be perfectly resurrected in another world at our exact moment of death

3 Mr X scenarios of Hick’s replica theory

1. disappears in NY and reappears in AUS, colleagues can identify Mr X by testing his memories (personal identity), therefore he is the same person

2. dies in NY and reappears in AUS, he is a replica

3. dies and and reappears in a ‘resurrection world’, its logically possible for resurrection to occur in the afterlife if you accept 1 & 2, this avoids the problem of continuity

2 religious criticism of replica theory

Jesus wan’t a replica so why would we be

if God is omnipotent and can make a replica, He would also make 10 so which one would be the real you

Hick’s counter to religious criticism

monist

Mr X’s body doesn’t have consciousness so there can only ever be 1 version of him

what are Plato’s 2 arguments for consciousness after death (immortality of the soul)

1. from opposites: you can go from life to death so you can go from death to life

2. recollection: knowledge of the Forms gives us innate knowledge of Forms of equality, we must’ve got this knowledge before birth (because its innate) so consciousness exists after death

Price belief about consciousness after death

afterlife is mind-based and completely different from this life

souls can communicate telepathically so a physical body isn’t needed

Swinburne belief about consciousness after death

light bulb argument

if you switch off a lightbulb it wont work, but all you need to do to make it work again is to switch on the power

its possible for an omnipotent God to make consciousness exist after death

what is reincarnation

souls are being reborn into new bodies after death

example of reincarnation

young boy claimed to remember facts about a past life that even his older family members didn’t know but were found out to be true

criticism of near death experiences

people aren’t actually dead so they have little value when talking about personal existence after death

what is psychological continuity

our thoughts continuing after death

what does Parfit believe about personal existence after death

bundle theory

• we’re ‘bundles’ of states of being, no fixed self

• we continue to have an influence for as long as we’re remembered (eg by loved ones)

what does Dennet believe about personal existence after death

science and technology may allow psychological continuity to happen

• brain is a computer model, we are a robot

• the brain would be uploaded to a platform and would control the robot bod

the body won’t survive but the conscience as a collection of memories will

objective immortality in process theology

• after death everything lives on in the mind of God because they existed as part of God

• no heaven, no personal identity after death

works with dual-aspect monism