philosophy substance Dualism (3 + 5)

Define dualism (3 marks)

• Dualists deny that the mind is the same as the brain.

• Some deny that the mind is wholly a product of the brain.

• The dualist viewpoint divides the human being into two substances: matter and mind.

• 
  

What is the objection to Descartes' argument of indivisibility based on not everything thought of as physical being divisible? (5 marks)

• There appear to be properties that human bodies can have which it is senseless to talk about dividing, but which are clearly physical: being too hot, being soaking wet, running, etc.

• You cannot break down these physical sensations.

• Although they are indivisible, it would be nonsense to suggest that they must be non-physical states.

• Descartes argues that extension is the essential property of physical objects. He then argues that what is extended is divisible.

• But can we always divide? The smallest physical particles are best understood as packets of energy. We cannot divide these any further.

What is the objection to Descartes' argument of indivisibility based on the mental being divisible in some sense? (5 marks)

• In cases of mental illness, for example, multiple personality syndrome, some might suggest that our mind can be divided.

• Modern neuroscience and experiments on the brain show that the mind is specially located in different areas. Different functions of the mind have particular locations in the brain, just like how the language function of the brain is situated in the left hemisphere.

• Psychological theories of the unconscious and conscious mind have suggested that our personality and mind may consist of three different factors: the id, ego and superego.

• Hume's bundle theory says that we cannot trace the idea of the self to an experience. All I am aware of are thoughts, feelings and sensations.

• I am not aware of a thing called the self having these experiences. In Buddhist thought, it is believed that the mind or self is merely an illusion.

What is the objection to Descartes' argument of indivisibility based on the mental being divisible in some sense? (5 marks)

• In cases of mental illness, for example, multiple personality syndrome, some might suggest that our mind can be divided.

• Modern neuroscience and experiments on the brain show that the mind is specially located in different areas. Different functions of the mind have particular locations in the brain, just like how the language function of the brain is situated in the left hemisphere.

• Psychological theories of the unconscious and conscious mind have suggested that our personality and mind may consist of three different factors: the id, ego and superego.

• Hume's bundle theory says that we cannot trace the idea of the self to an experience. All I am aware of are thoughts, feelings and sensations.

• I am not aware of a thing called the self having these experiences. In Buddhist thought, it is believed that the mind or self is merely an illusion.

Define substance dualism (3 marks)

• Substance dualism argues that the mind is a substance.

• A substance is an entity or thing that does not depend on another entity for its continued existence. It has ontological independence.

• For example, my pen is a physical substance.

What is substance dualism? (5 marks)

• Substance dualism says that the mind is a substance: an entity that has ontological independence, meaning it does not depend on other substances for its continued existence.

• Substances possess properties. For example, a chair is a substance that has the property of solidity. Properties do not exist without a substance. In the same way, thoughts need a thinker.

• Substances persist through changes in properties, just like how a snake may change in length by 1 cm. However, mental properties, such as thoughts, do not persist, whereas the thinker does persist.

• Substance dualism holds that there are two types of substances: the body, which is physical, and the mind, which is mental. They are distinct and independent of each other.

What is Descartes' conceivability argument? (5 marks)

• I have a clear and distinct idea of myself as something that thinks and is unextended (res cogitans).

• I have a clear and distinct idea of the body as something that is extended and does not think (res extensa).

• I can conceive that my mind exists without my body. If I have a clear and distinct thought of something, God can create it.

• Therefore, God can create the mind as thinking and unextended, and the body as non-thinking and extended.

• Therefore, the mind and body can exist independently of one another.

• Therefore, the mind and body are two distinct substances.

Mind without body is not conceivable (5 marks)

• This criticism argues that Descartes' claim that the mind can exist without the body is wrong.

• In everyday life, we see the bodies of our family and friends, not their minds. Therefore, if they lost their bodies and were just minds, we would not be able to recognise them.

• Therefore, the body is an essential component of who we are.

• If we reflect on our experiences, we find no concept of the mind. We are aware of sensations, thoughts and beliefs, but we are not aware of a particular owner of these conscious experiences.

• If the mind is immaterial, it also lacks extension, so it could not be a possible object of sense experience.

• Dualism says that the mind is what identifies who a person is, not their body. Someone's distinction between me and someone else is down to my mind.

• However, we can conceive of a mental twin who shares the same thoughts as me. What distinguishes my mind from my mental twin? We cannot appeal to anything physical or mental here, so there is no way of drawing a distinction.

What is conceivable may not be possible (5 marks)

• Suppose that a masked man has robbed a bank and I believe that my friend has not robbed the bank. Clearly, I can conceive that the masked man is not my friend, but this does not necessarily mean it is true.

• We cannot necessarily infer that it is possible for them to be distinct. It would not be possible at all if they were the same person.

• René Descartes argues that it is possible for the mind to exist independently of the body because he can conceive of it. However, this does not necessarily follow.

• It is possible that Descartes' conception of the mind or body is wrong, such that, unknown to him, the mind is not ontologically independent and it is impossible for it to exist separately from the body.

What is logically possible tells us nothing about reality (5 marks)

• There are many possible things that are not true.

• We can conceive of the mind as something that thinks and is unextended, or the body as something that does not think and is extended.

• However, equally, we can conceive that thought and extension are two properties of a single substance. There is nothing in our initial concepts of mind and body that opposes this.

• We can conceive of both thought and extension being metaphysically possible.

• Therefore, we can conceive of the mind and body as distinct substances, or we can conceive of an equally valid alternative in which thought and extension are properties of the same substance.

• Essentially, Descartes makes a logical leap from what is logically possible to reality, but does not show how this is real in comparison to the alternative logical possibilities.