The mind body problem

What is the problem? 

• Philosophers have found the relationship between the mind and the body to be problematic. 

• Humans have both a body and a mind. 

• It is not difficult to describe bodies as they all have physical properties similar to any physical object, human bodies are similar to complex machines. 

• When we try to describe our mind as it doesn’t have any physical attributes, describing it as a “grey organic mass” would be describing the brain but not the mind. However, we can describe our minds using our mental states. 

The mind allows us to: 

• To perceive, small and touch the world 

• To have self awareness

• To have dreams and hopes

• To feel emotions 

• To store and retrieve memories 

• To reason about the world 

• To communicate with others 

The human mind and bodies are often connected to each other

• Physical (like a cut on the finger) can produce mental states (like pain). 

• Mental states like feeling embarrassed can produce physical states like blushing. 

Substance Dualism 

Descartes theory

• From his famous quote “Dictum cogito, ergo sum” (I think, therefore I am). 

• He developed a theory of mind as an immaterial, unextended substance that engages in various activities or undergoes various states such as rational thought, imagining, feeling and willing. 

Proof 1 

Descartes argument from doubt 

1. I can doubt that my body exists 

2. I cannot doubt that I exist 

3. Therefore - I (my mind - ‘I am a thinking thing’) must be distinct (separate) from my body. 

Proof 2  

Argument from indivisibility 

1. The body is divisible into parts 

2. The mind is not divisible into parts

3. Therefore, my mind is different from my body 

Proof 3 

The mind can exist independently for the argument from irreducibility 

1. If substance dualism is false, then my mind cannot exist independently from my body 

2. My mind can exist independently from my body 

3. Therefore substance dualism is true

The gateway experience: investigating to separate the mind from their body 

The three main physicalist theories of the mind 

Behaviourism 

• Behaviourism, which translates to “mental states” defines a tendency to behave in a certain way. Our emotions or sensations are learned responses to the stimuli of the world. And this has nothing to do with mental states. 

• Gilbert Ryle uses conditional statements to do this. Eg. A person is thirsty, if there is water available, then that person would drink water. 

• In relation to the Mind and Body debate: the idea that the mind is redundant and that there is only the body. 

Three Parts to Behaviourism

• Psychological behaviourism 

  • Seek statements that can be verified, Psychological behavior can be verified through observation. 

  • Focuses on how organisms form association (cause and effect relationships) in the world in response to stimuli - the environment and how this is reinforced.

  • Disregards mental activities

• Logical/Analytical behaviourism 

  • The idea is that mental states are actually behavioural tendencies. 

    • Example: to believe in something (like the time of your appointment) is a tendency, and it has nothing to do with mental substance. 

  • But cause and effect are distinct, just because you know when the appointment is, doesn’t mean it will be the cause of your arrival. 

    • Example. Mental states like “John loves Lucy” cannot be determined whether it is true or false but behaviour can be like “John hugs Lucy and tells her he loves her”. 

• Methodological behaviourism 

  • Mental states do not add to the understanding of behaviourism in organisms. It is a private entity. Making it unsuitable for empirical study.  

  • Seeks to predict the response based on the stimuli, or when given the reaction. To predict the stimulus that has given rise to it. 

Criticism to behaviourism 

• Behaviourism was criticized for its neglect of the existence of inner mental states such as beliefs, desires, sensations and emotions. 

• The theory is too simple and it undermines the complexity of human behaviours by reducing our mental process into only simple stimulus-response connections that this theory fails to enrich the human mind.

Functionalism 

• Another theory of the nature of mental states, associated with the ontological and metaphysical theory. Instead of focusing on the materialistic aspect of the mind, for example, what it is made of, it focuses on its function (in the terms of inputs and outputs) 

  • Example: when getting injured, the role of the mind is to feel pain. This condition can only be met by creatures of internal states, where the role of their minds is to feel emotions. 

  • Similar to the relationship between a robot and a programmer,  a computer may not have a nervous system but if the programmer programmed the robot to run away from fear, then that is exactly what they will do. This analogy can be applied to humans. 

• Materialistic Solution to the mind and body problem  

  • Some aspects of the mental state could be associated with the physical state.

  • Supports the idea that the mental causation is heavily under the physical causation.

  • Consciousness and the mind cannot be explained by non-physical matter as the mind is essentially programmed.

  • The mind can be replicated with AI. 

Identity Theory

• The mind is identical to the states and processes of the brain, experiences are brain processes not correlation. 

• One’s identity is not qualitative but quantitative so it has no relation to the personal identity. These brain processes are also referred to as “Qualia”.

• Another name for identity theory is reductive materialism, that our mental states are just our brain states. 

The relation to the mind and body problem 

• The mind is part of the physical body, meaning that “mental states'' are the same as “brain states”. 

• A more materialistic approach as well, as there are more “laws” used to define the mind. 

The Qualia

• Lrving Lewis defined qualia as properties of sense - data themselves, intrinsic non-representational properties. However, this is not the same as just properties. 

• Example: something like being blue is not the same as someone experiencing blue. More personal approach. We might not all experience the same type of blue. 

Daniel Dennett’s four properties of qualia 

• Ineffable - cannot be communicated or apprehended by any means other than direct experiences   

• Intrinsic - Non-relational properties, do not change depending on the experience’s relation to other things. 

• Private - All interpersonal comparisons of qualias are systematically impossible   

• Directly or immediately reprehensible by consciousness - to experience a quale is to know one experience a quale, and to know all there is to know about that quale.   

Descartes conceivability argument 

• I have a clear idea of my mind as a thinking thing that is not extended in space. 

• I have a clear idea of my body as a non-thinking thing that is extended in space. 

• Anything I conceive clearly is something that god could create. 

• So it is possible for the mind and body to exist independently of each other. 

Responses

• Mind without body is inconceivable: 

  • Behaviourism states that to have mental states is to have behavioural dispositions, which is to be disposed to move your body in certain ways. 

  • This can’t be done without a body. 

  • So a mind without a body is inconceivable. 

• The things that are conceivable may not be physically possible: 

  • Just because something is logically possible (meaning that it doesn’t involve a logical contradiction) doesn’t mean it is physically possible 

  • Example: just because jumping onto the moon from Earth might be physically impossible but there is no logical contradiction in this idea. 

  • Similarly it is logically possible for a mind to exist independently of a body, this doesn’t automatically mean such a thing is physically possible. 

• Masked man fallacy:

  • Inference to Descartes's argument is that: 

    • I conceive of Batman as a caped crusader

    • I conceive of Bruce Wayne as a billionaire who is not a caped crusader 

    • Therefore Batman is not Bruce Wayne. 

  • Idea that things that are conceivable tells us nothing about how things are in reality. 

  • Just because you have an idea that the mind and body are separate things, this doesn’t mean they are separate things. 

Descartes’s Divisibility argument 

• My body is divisible 

• My is not divisible 

• Therefore my mind and body are separate things 

Responses

• The mind is divisible 

  • In cases of mental illness, a mind would be able to literally be divided, for example, someone with a personality disorder.

  • Another example is for a person who has literally had their brain cut in half. A corpus callosotomy is a surgical procedure for epilepsy where the main connection between the left and right hemispheres of the brain is severed. 

• Not everything that is physical is divisible 

  • Mind could be just be an invisible type of physical substance 

  • Physical bodies like the limbs are definitely divisible but if you keep dividing it, you might eventually reach a point where you cannot divide it any further as it would just be left with lots of atoms or reach a form of physical substance that is indivisible 

  • Descartes doesn’t prove that the mind isn’t indivisible

  • Descartes doesn’t prove that the body is divisible. 

Problems for Substance Dualism 

The problem of other minds 

• The question of what kind of evidence is available to prove that the mind exists within other people, because if substance dualism is true and the mind and body are actually two separate pieces, then it’s possible that some people are existing without a mind. 

 Mill’s argument from analogy 

• English philosopher John Stuart Mill responds to this with an analogy between his own mind and the minds of others:

1. I have a mind 

2. My mind causes my behaviour 

3. Other people have bodies and behave similarly to me in similar situations 

4. By analogy their behaviour has the same type of cause as my behaviour: a mind 

5. Therefor, other people have minds 

• However, this theory can’t be applied to everyone as it’s the same thing as saying “that dog has three legs so all dogs have three legs”. 

Other minds are the best explanation 

• Another response accepts that we can’t observe or prove the existence of minds, but says we should believe in their existence anyway since it is the best explanation. 

• One reason why is due to their explanatory and predictive power, if other people have minds, it would make sense why they behave the way that they do. 

Causal interaction 

• How mental things can casually interact with physical things when they are supposed to be two separate things. 

  • Example: If I’m feeling hungry (mental state) it might cause me to move my body (physical thing to the fridge to get food). 

• How does information of a non-physical thing transfer over tinto the physical world and cause things to happen? 

The conceptual interaction problem 

• The objection proof was created by Descartes’ own student, Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia: 

1. Physical things only move if they are pushed 

2. Only something that is physical and can touch the thing that is moved can exert such e force 

3. But the mind is not physical, so it can’t touch the body

4. Therefore , the mind cannot move the body. 

• 4 is definitely wrong so there is something else in the argument that made this completely wrong, the most likely one is 3 which implies that the mind is actually physical. 

The empirical interaction problem 

• The second law of thermodynamics (in physics) states that energy cannot be created nor destroyed but can be transferred from one state to another. 

• This means that energy cannot be created from anything outside of the physical universe and affect things within it. 

• Substance dualism says that the mental is supposedly something that is outside the physical universe 

• So therefore substance dualism will be false. 

Property dualism

• Presents the idea that there is that some minds have non-physical properties. 

• It's not saying that the mind is completely non-physical but this is different from physicalism in the property dualists believe a complete description of the physical universe would not be a complete description of the entire universe, they believe that a complete description if the universe would miss out qualia. 

• According to property dualism, it is possible for two physically identical things to be different in some way. More specifically, property dualism states that it's possible that two physically identical things could have different mental properties ‘ different qualia. 

Supervenience 

• The relationship between two kinds of things. 

• If something supervenes on something else, then it is dependent on that thing. 

David Chalmers: The Zombie Argument 

• A philosophical zombie is a person who is physically and functionally identical to an ordinary human except they don’t have any qualia. Such zombies are conceivable. Similar to Descartes conceivability argument: 

• Philosophical zombies are conceivable 

• If philosophical zombies are conceivable then philosophical zombies are metaphysically possible 

• If philosophical zombies are metaphysically possible then qualia are non-physical 

• If qualia are non-physical then property dualism is true 

• Therefore property dualism is true. 

Responses to the Zombie Argument 

• Zombies are not conceivable 

• Zombies are not (metaphysically possible) 

Problems with property dualism

Introspective self-knowledge

• The idea of asking: How do we know about our own mental states? 

  • If epiphenomenalism is true, qualia have no causal effects. 

  • If qualia have no causal effects, then knowledge of mental states is impossible. 

  • But knowledge of mental states is possible (e.g. I can know “I am in pain”). 

  • So, epiphenomenalism must be false. 

The phenomenology of mental life 

• In addition to causing knowledge, qualia can also cause other things. 

  • Example: if someone feels pain, this may cause them to feel sad. 

• If epiphenomenalism is correct, then qualia have no causal powers.

• Qualia obviously do cause other mental states so epiphenomenalism must be false. 

Evolution

• Evolution is that genetic mutations occur randomly, these genes often give benefit for survival. 

  • Example: long necks cause giraffes not to die of starvation. The causal effects of long necks genes clearly explain why giraffes have long necks. 

• But if epiphenomenalism is true then there would be no evolutionary benefit to having qualia because epiphenomenal qualia doesn’t have any causal effect. 

• So if the minds are the product of evolution, it would suggest that epiphenomenalism is false: qualia does have some useful casual role, otherwise we wouldn’t have evolved it. 

Monism

The two types of Monism 

• Materialism: The belief that nothing exists apart from the material world (ie. physical matter like the brain). Materialist psychologists generally agree that consciousness (the mind) is the function of the brain. Mental processes can be identified with purely physical processes in the central nervous system, and human beings are just complicated physiological organisms, no more than that. 

• Phenomenalism: Also known as subjective idealism, believes that physical objects and events are reducible to mental objects, properties and events. Ultimately, only mental objects like the mind exist. Irish philosopher Bishop Berkeley claimed that we think of our body as merely the perception of the mind. 

Free will and determinism

• Libertarianism: the theory that according to which human beings are free agents. Although the material world around us is determined by the laws of nature, human choices are subjected to these laws. Libertarians recognise that there are certain limitations due to the laws of nature like gravity as well as their upbringings. However, they still maintain the idea that freedom is always exercised. 

Key philosophers for libertarianism: 

• Rene Descartes: He believed that the mind (reference to substance dualism) is not confined to the rules of the physical world and is where we can exercise free will. Though his stance on free will has been debated over as his statements were brief and not in-depth enough to figure out what exactly he meant

• William James: Believed that determinism is contradictory to our moral values 

• Robert Kane: Modern-day philosopher who supports libertarianism. 

Criticisms 

• Free will and determinism: The compatibility with determinism is likely one of the major criticisms of libertarianism, if determinism is true that means all human actions are all predetermined and there's no room for genuine free will. 

• Another factor that challenges libertarianism is the Social Contract Theory, every individual has responsibilities and obligations towards each other and as a collective society if libertarianism is truly the only theory then the societal rules and institutions will be deemed unnecessary 

• Many argue that libertarianism is too simple of a theory although people may have the free will to make their own decisions this neglects the factor of the importance of how society, history and culture shape the person resulting in them generally systematically making a “predictable” decision. 

Strengths

• Libertarian appeals to the quantum indeterminate theory, which is the idea that the causes of some events are deterministic or random. This proves that physical aspects like the mind and it’s process to make decisions is not fully deterministic. 

• Libertarianism also rejects the concept of fatalism which is the belief that all events are inevitable. Whereas determinism accepts this, undermining our sense of responsibility and agency. 

• Unlike libertarianism, determinism threatens the ideation of a unitary self being the source of its own actions, which is essential for personal identity and autonomy.

Determinism: 

• Determinism is the idea that everything has a cause or a set of causes, what happened had to happen instead. 

• This can refer to natural events and the laws of nature but also support the argument for the existence of God as determinism would prove that God is omniscient (all-knowing) and can determine all your actions. 

• Determinists believe that our choices do not really come from our free will but from a series of causes that made them inevitable and theoretically predictable. 

Types of Determinism

Scientific determinism 

• It is the perspective that defines the results of science and scientific behaviour, saying that all events in the universe are ultimately determined by causal laws of nature. 

• The philosopher who first influenced this idea was Pierre-Simon Laplace, who proposed a hypothetical “demon” that could predict the future state of the universe with perfect accuracy if they knew the precise positions and velocities of all the molecules in the universe. 

• After Issac Newton’s discovery of calculus and the laws of classical mechanics, it made the assumptions of nature much more predictable. 

  • Example: the conservation of energy and the unchanging speed of time. Viewing that the universe is entirely mechanistic. 

Criticisms

• Freewill: If all human actions could be calculated it raises the question of whether we humans have genuine freedom. Determinism could undermine the point of moral responsibility, if everything was already determined then praises and blame would be redundant.    

• Quantum mechanics: The theory that describes the behaviour of particles at the microscopic level. According to its principles, certain events can occur randomly and cannot be predicted with certainty.

• Epistemological Limitations: Our understanding of causations are only based on our current scientific knowledge. Which are not perfect and are subject to be refined. However as they advance, it is possible to find new discoveries that may challenge our theory towards scientific determinism. 

Psychological Determinism: 

• The belief that all human thoughts, feelings and behaviours are ultimately determined by various factors such as genetics, past experiences and environmental influence. This presents the idea that we may have a causal chain of events that leads to every aspect of our psychological life.

 Sigmund Freud: the theory of the unconscious mind

• The mind is composed of three major components: 

  • The conscious

  • The preconscious 

  • The unconscious

• The unconscious mind particularly plays a large role in shaping human behaviour.

• One example is the unconscious process where an area of mental processes are way beyond the control of the conscious mind, for example, phobias. 

• Freudian slips as Freud proposes are the “slips of the tongue” we get when unconscious desires and contents slip into conscious expression. 

• But these unconscious desires could end up influencing the behaviour as effectively as external forces, like addictions, for example, gambling. 

B. F. Skinner: Theory of behaviourism 

• The theory of behaviourism also known as operant conditioning emphasizes the role of the environment in shaping and controlling behaviour. 

• Behaviour is determined by the consequences that follow it. 

• If behaviour is followed by a positive consequence (reinforcement), it is more likely to be repeated in the future. On the contrary, if the behaviour is followed by a negative consequence (punishment) then it is less likely to be repeated. 

  • Reinforcement 

    • Positive reinforcement involves providing a desirable stimulus.

    • Negative reinforcement removes an undesirable stimulus. 

  • Punishment: the application of an unpleasant stimulus or the removal of a desirable stimulus. 

Hard determinism

• The theory that every human action and choice is the inevitable result of a set of causes, which eliminates the possibility of human freedom. 

• Most determinists are materialistic as their beliefs that human beings are material beings subjected to the laws of the material world. 

Key philosophers: 

• Thomas Hobbes, an English philosopher in the 17th century presented a deterministic view in one of his works “Leviathan”. He believed that human behaviour was determined by natural laws and that freedom is simply the absence of external constraints. Hobbes argued that individuals act according to their desires and aversions which are determined by their nature and the circumstances they encounter. 

• Friedrich Nietzche, a 19th-century philosopher who argued the notion of complete human agency and challenged many factors beyond individual’s control can shape their actions and values. 

Criticisms of hard determinism

1. Incompatibility with human experience: Despite these philosophical arguments, generally have a sense of making choices and decisions to hspa either live within themselves. Hard determinism will contradict this part of human experience. 

2. Lack of moral responsibility: the absence of free will raises the question about the notions of praise, blame, punishment, and personal accountability as this means that humans are not morally accountable for their behaviour. 

3. Scientific challenges: hard determinism faces challenges of scientific disciplines like quantum physics, chaos theory and emergent properties. These concepts are strong evidence towards indeterminism which is the unpredictability of the natural world which could have implications to determinism. 

Soft determinism

• The theory that according to which there are many external factors influencing our decisions but there's an element of freedom still exists. Soft determinists tend to agree that all events are the inevitable results of some sets of causes. However they also point out that some of those causes are internal causes, causes that we have some control over.

Personhood 

• Personhood: The concept of what it means to be a person, including the attributes and characteristics that define personhood.

• Consciousness: The state of being aware and having subjective experiences, often considered a crucial aspect of personhood.

• Identity: The unique set of characteristics, beliefs, and values that distinguish an individual as a person.

• Autonomy: The ability to make independent decisions and act according to one's own will, often seen as a fundamental aspect of personhood.

• Dignity: The inherent worth and value of every individual, regardless of their abilities or circumstances.

• Rights: The entitlements and protections afforded to individuals based on their personhood, often including legal, moral, and ethical considerations.

• Moral agency: The capacity to make moral judgments and be held accountable for one's actions, often associated with personhood.

• Personhood theory: Philosophical frameworks and theories that seek to define and understand the nature of personhood.

Why is personhood important? 

• Personhood normally implies human rights. Once a being is granted personhood, they are given an amount of rights, respect and dignity that protects them from harm. 

• As beloved non-human characters like Superman who is an alien display qualities of a person such as compassion but they’re not necessarily human beings, so will they be granted the same rights as evil characters in the story like Lex Luthor?

• Sufficient conditions: a characteristic that is enough to make something belong to a category, this only works one way. 

  • Example: being a woman is a sufficient condition for a human being.

• Necessary conditions: a characteristic that is absolutely required for something to belong to a certain category. 

  • Example: you have to be male to be a monk but the key difference is that being male isn’t a sufficient condition to be a monk.

Philosophers who focused on personhood:

1. John Locke: Locke argued that personal identity is based on consciousness and memory.

2. Immanuel Kant: Kant emphasized the importance of rationality and autonomy in defining personhood.

3. Jean-Paul Sartre: Sartre explored the concept of existentialism, emphasizing individual freedom and responsibility.

4. Friedrich Nietzsche: Nietzsche questioned traditional notions of morality and explored the idea of the "Ubermensch" or the higher individual.

Consciousness

• One of the characteristics that was most cited as a condition for personhood. The basic characteristics of consciousness are:

  • Wakefulness

  • Awareness

  • Responsiveness

• However, it is difficult to consider this as a necessary condition as factors like people being in the state of a coma or the fact that some people in religions still respect people of the dead, but does that mean they still possess legal rights?

• John Locke focuses on personhood by emphasizing the concept of individual rights and the idea that personal identity is based on consciousness and memory. 

• He argues that individuals have natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and that these rights are inherent to their personhood. 

• Locke also discusses the importance of personal identity, stating that it is based on our ability to remember past experiences and have a continuous consciousness. 

• Locke's focus on personhood centers around the recognition of individual rights and the role of consciousness and memory in defining personal identity.

Self-awareness

Philippe Rochat and the Five Levels of Self-Awareness

• Philippe Rochat's Five Levels of Self-Awareness describe the developmental stages of self-awareness in early childhood.

1. Level 1: Differentiation - Infants start to differentiate themselves from the external world, recognizing their own body as separate from the environment.

2. Level 2: Situation - Toddlers become aware of their actions and their effects on the environment. They start to understand that they can cause changes and have an impact on objects and people around them.

3. Level 3: Identity - Preschoolers develop a sense of self-identity. They recognize themselves as individuals with unique characteristics, preferences, and emotions. They can use personal pronouns like "I" and "me."

4. Level 4: Permanence - Children understand that their physical and psychological characteristics remain stable over time. They recognize that they have a consistent identity that persists even when they are not directly experiencing it.

5. Level 5: Categorical - Older children can categorize themselves based on social and cultural attributes such as gender, age, nationality, and group affiliations. They start to compare themselves to others and develop a more complex understanding of their own identity.

• These levels of self-awareness unfold gradually as children grow and develop, shaping their understanding of themselves and their place in the world.

Immanuel Kant

• Kant's ideas on personhood are centered around the concept of autonomy and rationality. 

• According to Kant, personhood is not based on physical attributes or capabilities, but on the ability to reason and make moral choices. 

• He believed that individuals have inherent dignity and should be treated as ends in themselves, rather than as means to an end. Kant's ideas on personhood emphasize the importance of respecting individual autonomy and moral agency.

Criticisms of Kant's ideas of personhood

1. Exclusion of non-rational beings: Kant's emphasis on rationality as the basis for personhood excludes individuals who lack rational capacities, such as infants, individuals with severe cognitive disabilities, and non-human animals.

2. Lack of consideration for emotions and relationships: Kant's focus on rationality overlooks the importance of emotions and interpersonal relationships in defining personhood and moral worth.

3. Universalizability as a sole criterion: Critics argue that Kant's reliance on universalizability as the sole criterion for moral worth fails to account for the complexities of ethical decision-making and the context-specific nature of moral judgments.

4. Neglect of cultural and individual differences: Kant's universal moral framework may not adequately address the diversity of cultural values and individual circumstances, leading to potential ethical dilemmas and conflicts.

5. Limited recognition of autonomy: Some argue that Kant's emphasis on autonomy as the defining characteristic of personhood neglects the importance of other aspects, such as vulnerability, interdependence, and the influence of social structures.

Morality

• Morality refers to principles or standards of right and wrong behavior that guide individuals and societies. 

• It involves distinguishing between what is considered morally good or bad, and making ethical decisions based on these principles. 

• Morality can be influenced by various factors such as culture, religion, personal beliefs, and societal norms. 

• It plays a crucial role in shaping human behavior and interactions, promoting fairness, justice, and empathy.

• Specific moral values and ethical frameworks can vary across different cultures and individuals.

Turing test

• The Turing Test is a test proposed by Alan Turing in 1950 to determine a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior indistinguishable from that of a human. 

• It involves a human evaluator engaging in a conversation with a machine and a human, without knowing which is which. 

• If the evaluator cannot consistently distinguish the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the Turing Test.

The mental distinctions made by Descartes

• Descartes made several mental distinctions, including the distinction between mind and body, known as Cartesian dualism. 

• He distinguished between clear and distinct ideas, which he considered to be true and reliable, and confused or doubtful ideas. 

• Additionally, Descartes made a distinction between innate ideas, which he believed were present in the mind from birth, and adventitious ideas, which are acquired through experience.

Criticisms

• Mind-body problem: questions how the immaterial mind interacts with the physical body.

• Problem of other minds: challenges the ability to know if others have minds similar to our own.

• Neglect of complexity and interconnectedness: criticism of Descartes' dualism for overlooking the complexity and interconnectedness of mental and physical processes.

• Neglect of emotions and unconscious mental states: argument that Descartes' emphasis on rationality overlooks the role of emotions and unconscious mental states.

• Limitations and philosophical challenges: overall criticisms that highlight the limitations and philosophical challenges associated with Descartes' mental distinctions.

Freedom (Existentialism)  

Existentialism

• A philosophical movement that emerged in the 20th century focusing on the individual’s subjective experience and existence, emphasizing the freedom, responsibility and meaning of human life. 

• Existentialism rejects the idea that there is any predetermined or essential meaning to human life, instead, it asserts that individuals must create their own earnings and values through their choices and actions. 

Nihilism

• Derived from the Latin word “nihil” which means nothing, nihilism rejects the existence of any inherent or universal meaning in the world and denies the existence of objective moral or value systems. 

• Most notably associated with the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche, in which he argued that traditional moral and religious frameworks had lost their credibility, leaving a void in the understanding of existence. This void can either lead to the creation of new values but also to a state of meaninglessness  

Active Nihilism 

• The proactive engagement with the recognition of the absence of objective meaning involves an intended rejection of traditional beliefs and values as there is also the desire to create new values or systems of meaning. 

• This encourages individuals to take responsibility for constructing their values due to the recognition of the lack of inherent meaning. 

Passive Nihilism 

• The more resigned, apathetic response to the absence of meaning, involves a sense of disengagement or acceptance of the meaninglessness of existence without actively seeking alternatives. 

• Sometimes believers would engage in pleasure-seeking or immediate gratification without concern for long-term consequences. 

Similarities and differences in Existentialism and Nihilism 

• Similarities: 

1. Both reject the notion of objective, predetermined meaning or purpose in life. Challenging the idea that there is a universal, inherent meaning to human existence. 

2. Emphasizes the importance of individual freedom and personal responsibility. They recognise the significance of individual agency in shaping one’s life and values. 

3. Both acknowledge the existential angst or anxiety that arises from the recognition of the absence of objective meaning, exploring the dilemmas faced in confronting the potential meaninglessness of existence. 

• Differences: 

1. The attitude towards meaning and value, existentialism seeks to find subjective meaning in the face of the absence of objective meaning, emphasizing the capacity to shape their own life and values through authentic choices. While nihilism generally asserts that life is meaningless, denying the existence of any objective meaning. 

2. Existentialism promotes the idea of personal authenticity and the pursuit of values that align with one’s true self by addressing moral and ethical questions. Nihilism can lead to moral skepticism or relativism as it denies the existence of objective moral values and questions the validity of ethical systems. 

3. Existentialism generally has a more positive outlook on life due to the emphasis on the possibilities of personal growth. In contrast, nihilism can be seen as more pessimistic. 

Modernism

• A broad cultural and intellectual movement that emerged as a response to the social, political, technological and artistic changes of the time, encompassing fields including literature, visual arts, architecture, music and philosophy. 

• Some key features are innovation, rejection of realism, the influence of science and technology and its global reach. 

Relativism

• A philosophical position that asserts that truth, knowledge, morality or values are not absolute or universal but instead are relative to individuals, cultures, historical contexts or subjective perspectives. 

• The forms of relativism include: 

• Epistemological Relativism: holds that knowledge or truth is relative to individuals or social groups. Asserts that there is no objective or universally valid knowledge but that knowledge is shaped by subjective experiences 

• Moral relativism: Argues that moral judgment or ethical principles are relative to individuals, cultures or societies. 

• Cultural relativism: Cultural relativism maintains that cultural practices, customs, or values should be understood within their cultural context and not judged by external standards. 

Nietzsche

• Nietzsche significantly influenced both of these ideas, although he never explicitly referred to them in his theories, his ideas contributed to the development of these philosophical movements. 

1. Relativism: Nietzsche criticized traditional metaphysics, morality and religious beliefs, arguing that they were based on subjective human interpretations rather than inherent truths.  Nietzche’s perspectivism suggests that individual perspectives, historical contexts and cultural influences shape knowledge and truth. Aligning with the ideas of epistemological and moral relativism. 

2. Modernism: Nietzsche’s rejection of tradition and his call for the creation of new values beyond establishing norms resonates with the spirit of experimentation, and innovation which characterized the modernist movement. His concept of “will power” and his critique of traditional morality and religious beliefs addressed the prevailing social and cultural institutions at the time, aligning with the modernist impulse to question and transform established systems. 

• The story of the madman is a famous passage from Nietzsche’s book “The Gay Science” the story follows: 

  • A madman enters a marketplace claiming that he is searching for god. 

  • The people in the marketplace were described as atheists, mocked and ridiculed the madman and told him that God was dead and they had killed him. Bewildering the madman with this information. 

  • The madman then goes into a monologue, expressing the consequences of the death of God, that humanity will lose its source of meaning, value and moral order. And will result in a widespread nihilism, despair and moral chaos.  

  • This story of the madman illustrates Nietzsche’s thesis by showing how the death of God challenges traditional beliefs and moral systems, leaving individuals to grapple with the search for meaning in a world that lacks objective guidance. 

The self 

Is there such a thing as the self?

• The self, in a philosophical standpoint

• The self questions consciousness, personal identity and the nature of the mind. 

• It has been debated whether the self is a unified and enduring entity or a series of ever-changing perceptions and experiences.

The Buddhist notion of anattā or “not-self” + in contrast to western ideations

• Annata (translated to the “not self”) is a central basis in Buddhist philosophy. Buddhism provides an alternative viewpoint to positing an intrinsic self: 

  • Impermanence of self 

    • Self in Buddhism is sectioned into five skandhas: 

      • Form (physics body)

      • Feelings

      • Perceptions (intuition)

      • Mental formations (habits)

      • Consciousness. 

    • Each of these Skandhas is in a continuous flux, when evolved the percept of self will evolve → eventually denying the existence of eternal identity.

  • Absence of permanent identity

    • Before evolved, the perception of the self is an illusion formed by a temporary combination between the skandhas. This concept isn’t supposed to let people down but rather acknowledge that there is a path to liberty in suffering and motivates individuals to let go of self-centered desires. 

• This notion of anatta exudes parallels with Western ideations, for example an Existentialist perspective where (in summary):

  • Existentialist philosophers like Jean Paul Satre would propose that the concept of the “self” is a developing scheme. Where it will be refined through the choices and experiences of one throughout their lives and the “self” is not inherent. 

  • The freedom to decide for yourself brings responsibility, the anxiety that individuals may feel could be a consequence of the overwhelming liberty of existence. 

  • Although both viewpoints were derived from different cultural and religious perspectives: 

    • They both managed to reach the common ground that the “self” is constantly evolving, through self-reflection and realizing what choices are best for the individual. 

    • However, existentialism strongly emphasizes an individual taking accountability for their actions which is less touched upon in Buddhism. 

Simone De Beauvoir’s rejection of the concept of a solipsistic isolated self

• Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986) was a feminist philosopher, who mainly focused on existentialism during post-war France. One of her theories “The second sex: Woman as Other” is a seminal work on feminist philosophy published in 1949.

• This theory rejects the concept of a solipsistic isolated self as it emphasizes the social construction of identity, the relational aspect of identity formation and the impact of social norms. 

• Beauvoir stressed recognising the significance of the patriarchal structures on women’s lives, highlighting that identity is shaped through relationships, interactions and engagement with the wider world.

Pros of Simone de Beauvoir's theory "The Second Sex"

1. Integrates existentialist philosophy, emphasizing individual freedom and the importance of personal choice in shaping one's identity.

2. The theory acknowledges the intersectionality of gender with other social categories, such as race and class, highlighting the unique experiences and challenges faced by different groups of women.

3. Beauvoir's analysis uncovers the patriarchal systems that eternalise women's subordination, promoting critical examination of power dynamics and social inequalities.

4. It has been an influential guide to feminist movements worldwide, contributing to the advancement of women's rights and gender equality.

Cons of Simone de Beauvoir's theory "The Second Sex"

1. While Beauvoir recognises the intersectionality of gender, her theory has been criticized for not fully including the experiences of women from diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds.

2. Beauvoir focuses majorly on the experiences of middle-class women, potentially neglecting the obstacles faced by women from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.

3. Overemphasis on Biology: Critics contend that Beauvoir's theory places excessive emphasis on biological differences between men and women, potentially reinforcing gender essentialism.

4. Lack of Practical Solutions: While Beauvoir's theory provides a critical analysis of gender inequality, it has been criticized for not offering concrete solutions or strategies for achieving gender equality in society.

The relational self (e.g. Confucius)

• Confucius is a fifth century Chinese thinker, looking into the concept of relational self.

• According to his thought, individual beings are seen as an interconnected being whose identities are morphed through the relationship created with other individuals. 

• Also known as “ren or “jen”, the theory of relational self presents the significance of creating harmonious relationships within society. These relationships are made to develop virtuous qualities and strive to engage with ethical behaviour. 

• The relational self is not only based on an individual's fulfillment, but also the wellbeing and the flourishing of others. 

Pros of Confucius's theory on the relational self:

1. Confucius's theory highlights the importance of maintaining harmonious relationships with others. This promotes a sense of unity and cooperation within society, leading to a more peaceful and stable community.

2. Confucius acknowledged that individuals should aim for self-improvement via moral cultivation. This focus on personal ethics encourages individuals to grow virtues such as benevolence and filial piety, which can contribute to a more virtuous society.

3. Confucius stressed the value of family and the role it plays in shaping an individual's nature. This focus on filial piety and respect for elders encourages strong family bonds and a sense of duty towards one's relatives, which can contribute to a more supportive society.

4. Confucius believed in the transformative power of education. His theory advances the idea that education is essential for personal growth and societal advancement. By prioritizing education, individuals can attain knowledge, formulate critical thinking skills, and contribute to the improvement of society.

Cons of Confucius's theory on the relational self:

1. Potential for conformity: Confucius's theory places a strong emphasis on social norms and expectations. This can lead to a stifling of individuality and creativity, as individuals may feel pressured to conform to societal standards rather than express their unique perspectives and ideas.

2. Limited focus on individual rights: Confucius's theory prioritizes the collective over the individual. This may neglect the importance of individual rights and freedoms, potentially leading to the suppression of personal autonomy and self-expression.

3. Gender inequality: Confucius's theory reinforces traditional gender roles, placing men in positions of authority and women in subordinate roles. This perpetuates gender inequality and limits opportunities for women to fully participate in society on an equal footing with men.

4. Potential for hierarchical relationships: Confucius's theory promotes hierarchical relationships based on age, social status, and authority. While this can contribute to social order, it may also perpetuate power imbalances and limit social mobility, as individuals are expected to adhere to their assigned roles within the hierarchy.