Rene Descartes: The Issue Of Dualism

The issue of dualism has always been a topic of heated debates of philosophers. It is also worth pointing out that reaching a consensus regarding whether the mind is a separate substance or is the result of the matter of the brain is fundamental for philosophy since it will be able to settle numerous other disputes. However, as of now, no philosopher was able to present a point of view that would convince everyone in the validity of his reasoning. However, some philosophers were able to impact this discussion more than others. A good example is Rene Descartes and his arguments. This paper will oppose on the so-called divisibility arguments which suggests that mind and body can hardly be connected to each other genetically since they have different nature.

Reconstruction

To begin with, it may be useful to reconstruct the argument that Descartes makes in The Sixth Meditation. Thus, the philosopher points out that it is possible to divide the body into several parts. In other words, if something, for example, a leg, is taken from the body, the body will no longer exist in its entirety. That is why it is safe to say to the body is divisible. On the other hand, it is impossible to divide mind in that sense that it is impossible to take something from the mind. Since the issue of divisibility or indivisibility is a fundamental feature of nature, one might argue that body and mind have different nature.

Here is how his argument can be reconstructed:

P1 Nature of body is divisible. (A1 is B)

P2 Nature of mind is indivisible (A2 is C)

C Therefore, nature of body is not similar to nature of mind (A1 is not A2)

Explanation

It is quite obvious that a simple reconstruction of the argument will not present it properly. That is why it may be useful to pay attention to some particular points of it. The first and the most obvious one is what one may call “the test of divisibility”. The idea behind it is simple: if something can be taken from a particular phenomenon without destroying it, then the phenomenon is divisible. Descartes points out that if a leg is taken from the body, the body does not disappear, but a person can no longer walk properly. So, the ability to walk or to use the leg has been taken. Therefore, the body is divisible because it is possible to separate parts from it.

Contrary to that, Descartes insists that it is impossible to take some parts from the mind. This is how he proves his point: if a leg is divided from the body, a person will, obviously, not be able to move it with the help of one’s mind. Moreover, one will not be able to feel pain or anything similar because the leg is not connected to the rest of the body. However, Descartes notes that when the leg is gone, it is not the ability of the mind to feel the pain that is gone or the ability to feel, but simply a physical tool that allowed a person to feel. Therefore, he claims that “properties or powers” can be taken from the mind, but not actual parts. In other words, if the leg were attached to the body again, a person would have regained the ability to move and feel it.

Finally, one should also acknowledge the importance of the goal that Descartes tries to pursue: he was determined to show that mind and body are not two separate phenomena per se, but they are dramatically different in nature. That is why they cannot be genetically connected because they possess completely different characteristics. This can be compared to the heat and cold: if water is exposed to heat it evaporates which means that it turns to vapor and if water is exposed to cold it freezes which means that it turn into a solid object; therefore, heat and cold have completely different natures and they cannot genetically connect. This means that Descartes wanted to draw the attention of the people to the fact that it may be useful to approach the issue of dualism from a new perspective.

Criticism

In spite of the fact that Descartes is a well-known philosopher and that he may sound rather convincing while presenting his line of reasoning, there are many aspects of his argument that can be criticized. To begin with, it is important to point out that when he claims that body can be easily divided (premise 1), this may not be completely true. If one suggests that “a body” is a combination of every organ and limb, then taking a let will result in “a body” minus a leg. In other words, it will not be the same body that was before. Therefore, taking a leg from a body will result in the emergence of a new body that is similar to the previous one is everything except for a let. Therefore, bodies are not divisible in that sense that when something is taken, a new body emerges.

Secondly, the most important line of criticism is aimed at the fact that mind is not divisible, namely premise 2. A good example is the story of Phineas Gage. He was a construction worker whose skull was pierced by a rod. Surprisingly, he did not only recover, also lived 12 years after the accident. The rod destroyed much of his left frontal lobe. This has had a significant impact on this personality and behavior. The friends pointed out that Phineas was no longer the man they knew. Therefore, destruction (in other words, division) of a part of the body have dramatically changed his mind (in other words, personality). The story of Phineas Gage is a well-documented fact and it cannot be doubted.

It is quite obvious that there are people who support the line of reasoning and they will reject the claims made before. For example, the supporters of Descartes’ view will point out that the case of Phineas Gace is either exaggerated or misinterpreted. First of all, there is no reliable evidence about his personality before the accident; so, it is possible that the friends could no longer maintain relationships with him because he became famous. Secondly, when the left frontal lobe was destroyed, important parts of the brain that are responsible for certain kinds of behavior were removed. Therefore, it is similar to removing a leg: just like a person cannot walk without a leg, a person cannot utilize one’s mind fully without frontal lobe, but the abilities were not affected.

One would make no mistake suggesting that this line of reasoning is quite convincing. However, there are several flaws in it. First of all, it is a widely accepted fact that changes to the brain structure can result in changes in mind. A good example is a lobotomy: it has been performed widely and the effect that it had on the patients has always been similar. Secondly, the changes to brain are irreversible. That is why if a certain damage is done, then it is exactly the way the brain will stay for the rest of the mind if nothing worse happens. So, it would be logical to suggest that a person will get not another brain and the mind that one has with this damaged brain is the one that a person has. Therefore, speculation is about the abilities of the mind that are not manifested due to damage, but that exist are not valid.

Finally, it is also important to point out that Descartes operates with notions that are too subjective and cannot be proven directly. For example, he claimed that he feels that mind always represents a unity and it is impossible to divide it into parts. However, it is nothing, but his personal subjective vision of how mind works. Therefore, his claim is based on a single example. It is obvious that many people might agree with him, but it cannot be known for sure whether they feel their mind exactly the way Descartes did in order to state that their claims are completely identical. Therefore, the argument of this philosopher lacks objective support.

Conclusion

Having examined all the points that were mentioned in the paragraphs above, one is able to come to the following conclusion: the divisibility argument which was presented by Descartes is quite interesting as well as insightful as it contributes to the debate regarding dualism. Thus, the philosopher claims that the nature of mind and the nature of body are different because the first is indivisible and the second is divisible. There are some serious objections that can be raised. First of all, if one takes a limb from a body, the latter is no longer the same body that it used to be. Therefore, bodies are indivisible as well: this refutes the first premise. Secondly, it is possible to change one’s mind by changing one’s brain as the story of Phineas Gage shows it which makes mind divisible: this refutes the second premise.

The terms offer and acceptance. (2016, May 17). Retrieved from

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016.

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

freeessays.club (2016) The terms offer and acceptance [Online].
Available at:

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 28, 2024]
close
Haven't found the right essay?
Get an expert to write you the one you need!
print

Professional writers and researchers

quotes

Sources and citation are provided

clock

3 hour delivery

person