Mind body substance dualism impications
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
419
On Slideshare
419
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. MIND BODY SUBSTANCE DUALISM IMPLICATIONS The mind is about mental processes, thoughts and consciousness. The body is about physical aspects if the brain – neurons and how the brain is structured. One of the central questions in philosophy concerns the mind / body problem: is mind part of the body, or the body part of the mind ? If a person is a mind that has a body, how do these two existents interact with each other? Mind–Body Substance dualism, in philosophy, asserts that mind and body are distinct kinds of substances or natures. Substances here refers to entity that can exist on its own and has distinct properties and persists through change in these . It is evident that several positive and negative implications follow if a dualistic approach to reality is taken: 1) By far, one of the most frequently cited problems with mind/body dualism is its inability to explain how the mind can interact with the body. The mind, by definition, is an immaterial substance that can exercise causal powers over the body. How could the soul/mind, totally lacking in physical properties, cause things to happen in the body(physical body) or visa versa?Agency of the sort required for free will and moral responsibility appears to require mental causation. This objection seems to imply that it is not reasonable to hold that X and Y are causally connected if one does not know how X and Y are causally connected. Unfortunately, for the physicalists, this objection has a weakness; scientists know that electrical fields interact with atoms, but have no idea how this interaction takes place. Further, the physicalists has not posited a criterion that determines how unlike X and Y must be before a causal connection becomes unlikely. Finally, it could be that the causal interaction between
  • 2. mind and body is direct and immediate, without any intervening mechanism. In this case, the ‘how’ question of mind/body interaction is not applicable. 2) 2). Some philosophers have argued that if human beings are substantial minds, then one cannot know if other minds exist because one only has access to other persons through physical interaction. (solipsism)Other individuals could very well be robots who express common human behaviors, but have no mind or self. Does this describe the way reality is? The fact that persons seem to interact with each other is hard to reconcile with dualistic thought. 3) Substance dualism seems to have implications for how persons retain their individuality. Spatial locations cannot be ascribed to souls because they are non-physical entities; therefore, if souls are non-spatial, then how can one soul be distinguished from another? Dualistic thought requires that there be some sort of individuality to distinguish persons, but such becomes difficult if minds are non-spatial. Further, why is it that a soul only inhabits one body, rather than two, or three? The apparent loss of personal individuality has serious implications for the supporter of mind/body dualism. 4)The existence of substantial souls bears on the issue of person identity through change. Two fundamental views oppose the notion that persons remain the same over time: Physicalism and Epiphenomenalism. The former maintains that human beings are entirely creatures of matter. Epiphenomenalists are more dualistic in nature because they postulate the existence of mental properties; however, in this theory, the events at the physical level obey deterministic physical laws and mental events are mere byproducts .Both physicalists and epiphenomenalists ultimately ground the self in material processes and, therefore, believe that humans really have no constant identity. On the contrary, substance dualism views the soul as an unchanging entity, even though the properties had by the soul are continually fluctuating; therefore, according to substance dualism, personhood endures from birth to death.
  • 3. 5) It seems that personal identity through change has significant implications on the issues like punishment and fear of the future. First, if human beings do not retain personal identity over time, then why should society punish anyone for crimes? "The self that committed the crime in the past is not literally the same self who is present at the time of punishment" . In this case, every jail in the world holds innocent people who are being punished unjustly. Further, if selves do not continue into the future, then fear of the future must be an illusion. Only if it is possible to manipulate the future can one be anxious about what is to come. Substance dualism definitely makes sense of punishment and fear of the future. 6) Substance dualism also has some interesting implications for the issue of life after death.. Plato maintained that the soul must be immortal because there is no good reason to believe it can be decomposed or annihilated. Substance dualism allows for one to retain his/her personal identity after the event of death. If physicalism is true, then the body faces extinction at death; for the physicalists to maintain some respectable belief in immortality, he/she may have to postulate that God recreates bodies after death; however, this scenario reduces persons to mere replications of their original selves. In other words, "[w]e are not interested in becoming extinct at death and having a double recreated who looks like us or has our memories or character traits. 7) Not only does mind/body dualism make sense of immortality, but it also has implications regarding human rationality. According to Physicalism and Epiphenomenalism, people's thoughts, judgments, and actions are determined by physical forces. The problem with determinism is that it is self-refuting: "If my mental processes are totally determined, I am totally determined to either accept or reject determinism. But if my sole reason for believing or not believing X is that I am causally determined to believe it I have no ground for holding that my judgment is true or false" . If all judgments are the result of random chemical motion, then no belief can be held for any reasons whatsoever. Thus, physicalism and epiphenomenalism, if true, are self-refuting because they imply determinism, a view that leaves no room for rational beliefs.
  • 4. Now if the physicalist’s account of the self is true, and personal identity changes at every moment, then it follows that no person can ever think through an argument. If there does not exist an enduring self who is present at every stage of the argument, then one cannot hold the premises in any logical relation to draw a conclusion! Substance dualism solves this problem by claiming that the mind is an unchanging entity that remains the same throughout the process of deductive thought. 8) Mind/Body Dualism make sense of rationality, but it also has implications for morality. The dualistic perspective is consistent with the reality of moral choices because it allows for the free choice of virtuous actions. However, if human beings are determined machines, then no one would have control over his/her actions, particularly moral actions. It seems that, for moral decisions to exist, one must have the freedom of choice allowed in mind/body dualism. 9) Argument from reason If, all of our thoughts are the effect of a physical cause, then we have no reason for assuming that they are also the consequent of a reasonable ground. Knowledge, however, is apprehended by reasoning from ground to consequent. Therefore, if dualism were true, there would be no way of knowing it—or anything else not the direct result of a physical cause—and we could not even suppose it, except by a fluke. That is, in each case to assume the veracity of the conclusion would eliminate the possibility of valid grounds from which to reach it Several positive and negative implications follow from substance dualism as an explanatory hypothesis about reality. First, the problem of causal interaction between mind and body is a possible enigma for the substance dualist. Second, the problems of solipsism and personal individuality are indication that dualistic theory needs revision. However, substance dualism has positive implications on issues like personal identity through change and the plausibility life after death; the existence of substantial minds make further sense of human rationality and morally virtuous acts. Substance Dualism is certainly not a dead theory.
  • 5. MANJOT SINGH (2011CS10228) NEERAJ(2011CS10234) BHADRESH(2011ce10341)