Phil 30I W25 Lecture 3.2

INTRODUCTION TO MODERN PHILOSOPHY

• Early UC Riverside, Winter 2025

• Instructor: Matic Kastelec

LECTURE 3.2: ELISABETH–DESCARTES CORRESPONDENCE

Key Focus Areas

1. Understand Elisabeth’s challenges to Descartes regarding:

   • Mind-body interaction

   • Mind-body union

2. Evaluate Descartes's responses, specifically the concept of "primitive notions."

3. Discuss the Cartesian Circle objection and potential responses from Descartes.

ELISABETH'S CHALLENGE TO DESCARTES

• Dualism Assertion:

  • Soul (mind) as immaterial, thinking substance.

  • Body as material, extended substance.

• Motion Consideration:

  • All motion requires physical contact.

  • Contact and extension clash with the nature of the soul, creating a paradox: Can an immaterial soul move a material body?

CARTESIAN RESPONSES

Primitive Notions

• Definition of Primitive Notions:

  1. Extension: Pertains only to the body.

  2. Thought: Pertains only to the soul.

  3. Union: Relates to the combined essence of soul and body.

• Assertion of Union:

  • Union is basic and cannot be fully explained by extension or thought alone.

  • Acknowledges that the soul does not exert movement on the body in the same way one body moves another.

ELISABETH'S PERSPECTIVE

• Elisabeth's Critique:

  • Easier to imagine the soul as extended than an immaterial soul moving a body.

  • Sees a fundamental difficulty in understanding how the soul interacts with the body.

• Notable Quote:

  • "I admit that it would be easier for me to concede matter and extension to the soul than to concede the capacity to move a body..."

DESCARTES' ADDITIONAL INSIGHTS

Clarification of Primitive Notions

• Extension: Best understood through imagination (limited to body).

• Thought: Best perceived through pure understanding (limited to soul).

• Union: Best discerned through senses (combined understanding of soul and body).

ELISABETH'S FURTHER OBJECTION

• Senses provide evidence of the soul moving the body but do not clarify the mechanics of this interaction.

• Suggests the claim that the soul is immaterial is fundamentally challenged by this lack of understanding.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ELISABETH AND DESCARTES

THE CARTESIAN CIRCLE

• The circular argument question raised by Arnauld:

  • Concern regarding the assumption that clear and distinct perceptions are true due to God, while also asserting that the knowledge of God comes from those perceptions.

CIRCLE EXPLAINED

• Descartes’ framework:

  • Clear and distinct ideas are true because of God's existence and non-deceptiveness.

  • His proof of God's existence is itself based on these clear perceptions.

DESCARTES' RESPONSE TO ARNAULD

• Asserts the dependability of reasoning and clear perceptions, noting that certainty of God exists through arguments but relies on memory of previous perceptions for truth validation.

SOLUTION TO CIRCULARITY

• Clear and distinct ideas held during perception cannot be doubted, but when they are not actively perceived, doubt arises (e.g., evil demon hypothesis).

• To eliminate indirect doubt, demonstrating a non-deceiving God via actively perceived premises is essential.

SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS

• Elisabeth presents a conundrum about mind-body interaction, arguing the immaterial soul seems incompatible with physical interaction.

• Descartes holds that mind-body union is a primitive notion not necessitating complex explanation.

• The Cartesian Circle examines whether Descartes' validation of God’s existence is circular, relying on affirming what one perceives clearly and distinctly.