Cartesian Coordinate Equations

Cartesian Coordinate Equations
As the name suggests, cylindrical coordinates are 3–dimensional and involve polar coordinates. It
combines the 3–dimensional Cartesian coordinate system (x, y, z) with the polar coordinate system
(r, θ). The "r" stands for radius while the "θ" stands for theta (the angle usually represented in
radians). The x and y are replaced with the polar coordinate system while z stays the same.The
coordinates are shown in this manner: (r, θ, z). Graphing cylindrical coordinates is easy as long as
you know how to graph in polar coordinates and in the 3D Cartesian system. First you look at only
the xy–planes to locate (r, θ). Start at the positive x–axis and go in a counterclockwise direction
however many radians or degrees are stated. Then use r to know how far from the pole, center, to
go. If r is a negative number, then it is in the opposite side of theta (so θ=ᴨ/4 becomes θ=5ᴨ/4) and r
away from the pole. The conversion from (x, y, z) to (r, θ, z) only requires the polar coordinate to
Cartesian coordinate equations.Therefore the following equations are used: cos θ=x/r, sin θ=y/r, tan
θ=y/x, r2=x2+y2, and z=z (Zill, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Anytime there is a circle on the xy–plane, it is stated with the radius of the circle, for instance r≤4
would be a solid circle with radius 4 since the radius is anywhere within the distance of 4 from the
center. Now to make a circular cylinder function, you would need a solid circle in the xy–plane and
a possible domain for z (either going on for infinity or specify an interval such as 0≤z≤5 where z is
only in the interval from 0 to 5). A cone is not much different from a cylinder, but in a cone the
radius and z are either directly or inversely proportional, so as z changes, the radius changes with it.
An equation for a cylinder then could be written as r≤4, z=r. This states that the solid circle on the
xy–plane is the biggest when z=4 and shrinks down to 0 as z goes to
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Cartesian Dualism Essay
Many would argue between the existence of the mind–body. One may say that the mind and body
are two separate entities with distinct characteristics (Dualism). While on the other hand, some may
say that there exist only one entity (Monism). The mind represents mental processes such as
thoughts and consciousness. The body represents physical aspects of the brain such as neurons and
the formality of the brain. The debate over the mind–body existence have been constant through
teachings and influences from intelligent philosophers. Rene Descartes' Meditation on First
Philosophy, he states that there exist two different entities the mind and body and that they both
interact with each other. Gilbert Ryle's The Concept of Mind critiques Descartes's ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Descartes teachings remain as a standard of modern Western philosophy. In one of Descartes'
meditations he proposed one ideology called Cartesian Dualism. Cartesian Dualism is the theory
that there exist two distinct entities, which are the mind and body. Descartes claims that the body
and mind can operate without one another. The physical state (body) consist of as matter and is
extended in space; and the mind, which is not extended in space is a thinking substance. To first
understand Descartes' viewpoints we must consider his theory of doubting the foundation of
knowledge. He doubted everything such as his body, however he could not doubt his mind. To think
is to exist, thus he created the phrase "I think therefore I am". The existence of the body can be
doubted, however the mind can not be. Therefore, these two must have different properties, thus
they are two separate entities. The idea of an afterlife or an immoral soul can be an example of
Cartesian Dualism. For instance, if you were to die and your body will cease to exist however the
mind will still be able to think. The mind and the body are harnessed together, but after separation
(death), the mind will continue to exist and

A Brief Note On The Semi Rings 5
ON BORNOLOGICAL SEMI RINGS 5
Theorem 3.8. Let (A; β) be a bornological semi ring and f : A ! C be an epimorphism of semi rings.
Then βf = fB ⊂ C : f −1(B) 2 βg is a semi ring bornology on C:
Proof. Let B1; B2 2 βf: Then there exist B1 A; B2 A 2 β such that f(B1 A) = B1 and f(B2 A) = B2 so
f(B1 A + B2 A) = f(B1 A) + f(B2 A) = B1 + B2 and f(B1 A · B2 A) = f(B1 A) · f(B2 A) = B1 · B2,
therefore βf is a semi ring bornology on C.
Proposition 3.9. Let (A; βi)i2I be a collection of a bornological semi ring, then i2Iβi is a semi ring
bornology on A.
Proof. It is known that β = Ti2I βiis a bornology, we must show that it also is a semi ring bornology.
Let B1; B2 2 β, then B1; B2 2 βi for any i 2 I, hence B1 + B2 2 βi and
B1 · B2 2 βi since βi are semi rings bornology. Therefore B1 + B2 2 β and B1 · B2 2 β,
i.e., the additive and multiplication operation are bounded.
A morphism of bornological semi rings : (A; βA) ! (C; βC) is defined to be a bounded semi ring
homomorphism if the image under of every bounded subsemi ring of A is bounded. It is clear that
the composition of two bounded semi rings homomorphisms is bounded, so we can define the
category of bornological semi rings denote
Born(SRings), with objects bornological semi rings and arrows bounded semi ring homomorphisms.
The category of bornological semi ring admits limits, colimits with the following description. Let
(Ai; βi)i2I be a family of bornological semi rings, then the direct product
Qi2I(Ai; βi)i2I is defined to be

Descartes 'Cartesian Skepticism'
Cartesian Skepticism Cartesian Skepticism refers to the use of methodical doubt as a tool for testing
beliefs and reaching certainty.It was devised by Ren´e Descartes Ren´e Descartes (1596–1650) is
considered the father of modern philosophy. In addition to being a philosopher, he was also a
renowned mathematician and scientist. Many times Beliefs are built on other beliefs. If we can
remove all our false beliefs, we are guaranteed to be building on a good foundation.The method
Descartes gives us for doing this is the Method of Doubt: Reason now leads me to think that I
should hold back my assent from opinions which are not completely certain and indubitable just as
carefully as I do from those which are patently false.According to the Method of Doubt, Descartes
refuses to believe anything which can be doubted; this way, we can hope to find exactly what we are
certain of.A Cartesian skeptic will claim that no empirical argument about anything other than one's
own mind and its contents is sufficiently justified because there are always admissible grounds for
doubting it. Try to imagine if we suddenly doubted the reliability of the numerous authorities we
have trusted as sources of information about the world around us ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Our Sensory experiences portray the world to us as being a undoubted way. The best way to
understand this belief of the content of experience is to imagine yourself in a situation in which the
senses are likely to be unreliable. The important point is that the senses are regularly making us
believe about how things are in our surroundings.Our visual experiences are well known for being
unreliable about some matters.When we place a straw in a glass full of water and look at it from the
sideways, We would see a bent straw, when in fact the straw is not

Examples Of Cartesian Skepticism
René Descartes was an extremely influential 17th–century philosopher and came up with many
ideas that still persist to this day. One of those ideas was Cartesian skepticism, which states that the
view that we do not or cannot have knowledge in regard to a particular domain, knowledge, in this
case, is justified, true, beliefs. He first comes up with his idea of skepticism in the first part of his
work Meditations On First Philosophy, aptly named Of the things which may be brought within
the sphere of the doubtful. In his first meditation, he discusses his doubts with sensory
illusion/error, possible dream states, and regarding deception by an evil demon. However, after
dissolving his first two doubts, he gets stuck on the third and

Difference Between Cartesian Dualism
Today, a forum of Cartesian dualism is arising in the mental health fields. With our ever advancing
knowledge in neuroscience, a dichotomy has transpired wherein 'psychologically based disorders'
are treated with psychotherapy whilst 'biologically based disorders' are medicated. (Gabbard, 2000)
From the dualist stand point this makes sense as mind and brain ––being two separate entities––
should be treated separately. However, the dichotomy makes far less sense when applied to
abnormal behaviour, where distinctions between psychological and biological mechanisms are
seldom so pronounced. In conditions such as OCD, symptoms often manifest in ways indicative of
complex interaction between cognition and neural circuitry, calling for a more holistic view
integrating cognitive and biologically based theories as opposed to viewing the two as mutually
exclusive.
Arguing against integration are deterministic views of mind; postulating all phenomenon ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Functional neuroimaging provides data regarding activity in specific structures either during
symptom provocation or at rest. This is done by measuring glucose consumption and/or overall
localized metabolic rates. The key difference between this quantification and traditional quantifiers
of behavioral abnormality is reproducibility, and moreover the elimination of self reporting which –
as Hoskin indicates–is inherently flawed. It can be argued that functions of our brain cause our
behaviors, but the question of causality has no implication on glucose consumption or metabolic
rates because the macroscopic properties are identical in both scenarios. Essentially, a behavior and
its neurobiological correlates will be the same irrespective of which gives rise to the other. It is
important to note that functional neuroimaging at this point shows only correlative relationships
which must not be taken as

Cartesian Dualism : The Nature Of Reality
Nature of Reality Of all the different categories of metaphysics, I believe that dualism is correct.
Dualism is the view that the world is composed of two types things: material and mental. In our
textbook, Philosophy in Practice: An Introduction to the Main Questions; Second Edition, Morton
describes dualism as, the view that mind and matter are very profoundly different–so different that
understanding one of them leaves basic facts about the other unexplained (Morton, 317). He went
on to explain this by saying that no amount of human knowledge will provide complete
understanding of the human mind. There are many things in this world that have been physically
created, and many concepts that have been mentally constructed. The view of dualism supports both
of these claims. I will be providing arguments that support each claim of my view. Both physically
and mentally constructed concepts are real, therefore I believe that that materialism and idealism are
incorrect. Although mind and matter are different, I feel that they can interact with each other and
can exist without each other. Any object that we are able to physically hold in our hands is viewed as
a material construct. We are completely surrounded with things that have been physically created by
different people in different ways. For anyone who believes that dualism is the most correct view
will believe that our whole world is composed solely of mind and mental matter. Cartesian Dualism,
created by Rene

Cartesian Dualism Argument Paper
My purpose in this paper is to explain and clarify Descartes' view of mind, also called Cartesian
dualism by René Descartes, widely regarded as the father of modern philosophy (Newman 2014) in
the middle of the seventeenth century. Lavelle (2014) concludes that Descartes thought that the
mind is distinct from the body and that the mind must be made of a fundamentally different
substance to that of the body and other things found in the physical world. Descartes' argument is
expressed by Lavelle (2015, p. 40) through 'argument from doubt'. Furthermore, this paper will
explain the biggest problem of this view, the strongest point being that Cartesian dualism does not
explain how mind is connected to the body. The paper will compare what it ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Descartes gives two different definitions of substance, being material and immaterial substances.
Lavelle (2014) concludes that material substances occupy a certain amount of space (and our bodies
and everything else in the world are composed of them), while immaterial substances do not occupy
any space, for the reason that minds are made of immaterial 'thinking' substance. According to one
definition of substance dualism (Calef 2005) the mind and the body are composed of different
substances and the mind is a thinking thing that lacks the usual attributes of physical objects such as
size, shape, location and solidity. Descartes calls the mind a thing that thinks and not an extended
thing. He defines the body as an extended thing and not a thing that thinks, meaning Descartes
believed that mind and body are different things because the body, by its very nature is something
visible, whereas the mind is plainly invisible. Additionally, Descartes argues (Calef 2005) that the
mind is indivisible because it lacks extension. The body, as an object that takes up space, can always
be divided, whereas the mind is simple and non–spatial. Since the mind and body have different
attributes, they must not be the same

Cartesian Dualism
In Meditations on First Philosophy, René Descartes came to understand that bodies and
minds/souls are made of two separate substances, creating a theory known as Cartesian dualism.
Paul M. Churchland rejected Cartesian dualism in favor of an eliminative materialist stance of
understanding in his Matter and Consciousness. While, Gretchen Weirob and Sam Miller discuss
the possibility of an individual's soul being able to continue one's existence after death in A
Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality. I will be supporting Churchland's theory.
In Meditation VI, Descartes explains to us what bodies and minds are. He says that bodies are made
with a substance that is bound to the laws of nature. In other words, anything that is comprised of
matter is considered a body. Minds are made of some other immaterial substance that allow for
thinking, understanding, deciding, perceiving, doubting, reasoning, etc., and are not bound to the
laws of nature. He supports his belief with [T]here is a great difference between mind and body
[our bodies are made of physical matter], inasmuch as body is by nature always divisible [as is all
matter], and the mind is entirely indivisible. [ ... ] [T]his would be sufficient to teach me that the
mind or soul of man is entirely different from the body. (Descartes ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The first reason is that folk psychology cannot sufficiently explain some of the most apparent
mysteries of our daily lives, such as sleeping. Secondly, previously believed folk psychologies have
been abandoned in favor of more correct ones, such as geocentrism being abandoned for
heliocentrism. It's unlikely that this particular folk theory is correct, when we were wrong every
other time. Lastly, trying to mold neuroscientific findings with folk psychology would be
unnecessarily complicated, and would compromise the findings

The Cartesian Theory Of Mind
René Descartes was a French philosopher responsible for many ideas and theories still used in the
philosophical world today. He earned the nickname Father of modern philosophy for his work.
One of his most in depth and lasting legacies is his mind–body dualism thesis also known as the
Cartesian theory of mind.
The Cartesian theory states that there are two different types of existence, physical and mental.
Whatever exists must fall into only one of these existences and they cannot be both. This could be
compared to the two faces of a coin, where when you flip a coin it has to be either heads or tails,
when looking at the world it is either in the physical world or the mental world. Another example is
how animals are either male or ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
So a body's life is a public affair, much like the lives of animals and plants.
Minds, however, are different from bodies. Minds are not in space, since they do not occupy space
like a body does. Minds are part of mental existence. The processes of the mind are not subject to
mechanical laws like bodies are. Also the workings of someone's minds are not able to be witnessed
by other people, like a human body is able to be. When you use your mind and you think, imagine
or feel an emotion, other people cannot see what is going on in your mind. Since the workings of
one's mind are not able to be observed, this makes the minds life a private affair. This means that a
person lives two lives. The first is what happens to his body and the other is what happens in his
mind. What happens to the body is in the physical world while what happens in the mind is in the
mental world (Ryle). The view that physical objects are in a common field (space) and mental
processes occur in a isolated field known as the mind, is the ontological way, while the way that
only our bodies can meet and we cannot interact with each other's minds is the epistemological
way. Gilbert Ryle sees that Descartes divides a person's life into two halves, one being external and
the other being internal. Every physical thing, including the body, belong to the external half and
physical world, while the

Rene Descartes And Cartesian Dualism
In his Meditations, the 17th Century mathematician and philosopher Rene Descartes raised
arguments for the possibility of mind–body substance dualism, the belief that the mind and the body
are two separate and distinct entities. So closely associated with Descartes this argument became,
that it is now commonly referred to as Cartesian dualism. However, as many philosophers have
noted both during and following Descartes lifetime, Cartesian dualism raises what is known as the
'mind–body problem', which questions how the mind and body can causally interact. Many
philosophers have attempted to address this problem, either by rejecting dualism altogether for
monist views such as physicalism or idealism, or by maintaining that Cartesian dualism can be
compatible with mind–body interaction. This essay will address whether Cartesian dualism can
satisfactorily account the interaction between mind and body, and in doing so will analyse/critique
the responses offered by Descartes as well as contemporary substance dualists, whilst contrasting
these views with the monistic views which argue that there is no separation between mental and
physical states.
It is at first worth noting that Descartes was not the first to address the issue of dualism. Indeed,
dualist philosophy goes back at least as far as Plato, who argued that there was a distinction between
the ephemeral, corporeal physical body and the eternal, ethereal soul which Plato believed to inhabit
the body during life and continue to exist beyond death. Plato regarded the body, along with all
things which exist, to be an imperfect copy of what he called 'Forms', and that the existence of a
distinct soul was necessary to acquire innate knowledge. Plato's justification for his arguments seem
reasonable, he recognised that the senses could be deceptive and that for us to understand the real
world it must be through reason, therefore for us to acquire an understanding in the physical world it
would make sense that an immaterial part of us has a knowledge of the external forms. Plato's
dualism does have some significant flaws, mostly so is the fact that Plato's idea of a particular soul
being bound within a particular body is not sufficiently explained, how can an

Cartesian Aesthetics
Journal 2 (Truth)
Introduction
Aesthetics and truth are interlinked as one induces the other. Aesthetics are the philosophy of taste
and beauty and vary from person to person. These determine the varying realities and truths for an
individual. The abilities of a person to identify beauty in things differ from another and this is why
truth also varies among people as it depends upon the notions and conceptions expressed in terms of
assertions.
What is Cartesian Aesthetics and how did/does it affect design? Use specific examples and explore
how the concept of aesthetics is linked to that of truth.
Cartesian aesthetics anticipated that Nature and motivation are same: the procedures that direct
science also direct the fine arts. One imperative ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One was the reality of the senses. This is pertinent to the fact that reality of the physical world
includes all that is present in the society, whereas, the second reality is of the mind. The thoughts
and beliefs of an individual form a second reality and it is universal and unchanging. In the second
reality, conceptions of truth, ethics and justice come into play. Hence, the mind decides the truth of
all things by its thoughts and beliefs and no truth is more universal than that. Truth varies from
people to people. This is eminent in the photographs of any photographer. People see what they
want to see in them and various people can see various things in a single photograph depending on
their thoughts.
A person is likely to ask many questions while watching a photograph while some people may ask
different questions3. This is photographers try to convey a singular theme in their photographs so
that the viewers could discern a certain conclusion from them. Although they may agree or disagree
with the conclusion of the theme, they are able to identify the thoughts of the photographer in the
photographs.
3 Becker, Aesthetics and truth, 26–28.
Last Name

Descartes 'The Cartesian Method Of Doubt'
The Cartesian method of doubt is a process in which one systematically considers all things
purported to be true and attempts to find a scenario in which they may be untrue. In Descartes' own
words, the purpose of this method is to demolish everything completely and start again right from
the foundations . Indeed, by annihilating all which may be considered untrue, Descartes wishes to
reconstruct reality based only principles which are unconditionally true. I believe that Descartes is
correct in his methodology and successful in his attempts to demolish everything dubitable and start
again from the foundations. In support to Descartes' method of doubt, I will consider the dreaming
argument. In opposition to Descartes' method of doubt, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As previously stated, the purpose of the Cartesian method of doubt is to systematically doubt
everything which cannot be understood to be true with absolute certainty. Before we begin, we must
be clear on the definition of doubt from a Cartesian perspective, specifically, the distinction between
belief–defeating doubts and justification–defeating doubts. The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy explains the difference as follows [there are] two kinds of doubt, in terms of two kinds
of ways that doubt can defeat knowledge. Some doubts purport to undermine one's conviction or
belief – call these 'belief–defeating doubts'. Other doubts purport to undermine one's justification
(whether or not they undermine belief) – call these 'justification–defeating doubts'. Descartes'
method of doubt requires justification–defeating doubts, which means the justification for the belief
in question is dubitable, not necessarily the belief itself. This distinction is important when
examining the method of doubt, but even with this justification–defeating requirement of
dubitability in mind, it does feel as if the method is asking a bit much. Descartes is essentially
asking the reader to doubt every

Cartesian Dualism Argument Analysis
The mind–body problem has been pondered on for many centuries about how are the soul or mind,
which holds beliefs, thoughts, and actions are related to the physical body. Rene Descartes would
separate the mind and body into two different categories. This will be called Cartesian Dualism or
Descartes' theory of the mind, where the mind is immaterial and can only hold mental stuff while the
body can only be involved with physical things and movements. The other side of this argument
would be the absence of the mind and only the brain exists, therefore our brain is the origin for our
thoughts, beliefs, and experiences. This leads to the fundamental problem of dualism: how does an
intangible thing (mind) can interact with a physical thing (body)? ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This was brought up by Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia, she states only physical objects can only be
caused and affected by other physical forces and actions. This will be later called as an empirical
problem and interactionism, the working of the mind and the body will collide with this theory.
Descartes will argue this claim by casting doubt that we know we have a mind from his infamous
quote Cogito, ergo sum (translate– I think, therefore I am). This allows the clear and distinct
perception of one's existence. But we have doubt that our body exist, so at least we know our mind
and body is two different things and the body cannot exist by itself because we can prove our mind
exist because we are proving our existence by thinking, since we are a thinking substance disproves
we have only a body without a mind. Behaviorists like Skinner will defend that the mind doesn't
consist of private thoughts and it can be predicted by the behaviors and actions expressed. For
example, seeing someone keeps trembling their legs, turning red, sweating and making constant
breathing sounds can say they're nervous. Ryle will also agree with this claim since he was an
analytical behaviorist that since we know we have a mind, others should exhibit similar behaviors
and have similar minds. A problem with this claim, this is not entirely true since we can only our
mind exist not others. Also with one of the definitions of the mind that it is invisible and is only
assessable to the person making it private. Therefore, Descartes will say we only know our existence
and not others, they can be illusions or deceptions similarly to the evil demon in Descartes'
Mediations in First Philosophy. It basically says the external world does not exist except for the
illusion of our body and sensations. In Descartes's The Passions of the Soul consist of replies to

Cartesian Skepticism Essay
Cartesian skepticism is a form of skepticism or methodological skepticism that is linked with the
writings and methodology of Rene Descartes. It refers to the systematic process of being doubtful
regarding the basis of one's convictions, which has culminated to a well–acclaimed method in
philosophy. The main idea behind Cartesian Skepticism is that we do not have the capability to get
knowledge of the outside world. In the event that an individual finds a reason to doubt a particular
proposition, then, he or she is unaware that that position is true; as such, knowledge is not an action–
guiding belief and if humans are supposed to gain knowledge of the external world, it must to be
through the senses. Cartesian skepticism is defined by ideas ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This is because all human beings at some point or the other have doubted the foundational beliefs on
which any school of thought has been based, basically our belief in the capability of our senses to
present to our knowledge of the planet earth. The only thing that man is sure of is the several
concepts and experiences immediately within our minds. External world skepticism is thus arrived
at, the idea that any human being is unable to be aware of any particular thing so long as it is out of
his temple (McBrayer,

The Cartesian Rationalism Of Descartes
Cartesian Rationalism Descartes is considered to be the father of modern day Western Philosophy,
and was a mathematician who began to consider if what he knew was actually true. Born into
medieval times where the global knowledge was coming unwound, everything that had been
considered common knowledge was coming into question. He concluded that nothing was true,
unless you could sway any argument against it. This method of system doubt would leave him with
a core bit of knowledge to build upon, but it wasn't without skepticism. The knowledge, and the way
that we acquire it is known as epistemology, and unless we can all agree on how we know what is
real, there will not be an agreement upon what we know. To say something is certain because we
perceive it that way creates a gap between the way different people can view the same thing, but
neither are inherently wrong based on their senses. We must have different ways of describing the
same substances, due to how they can change and go through a metamorphosis, but in the end, they
are the same substance. This brings up the question on whether or not our senses are reliable enough
to come to a real understanding, and the example used of wax melting shows that his understanding
gave him the real answer, while his senses would have deceived him. The systemic doubt provides a
blanket, to ensure that the root cause of something is understood, much like the 5 why system that
technicians use today. Understanding when and where to

Examples Of Cartesian Skepticism
Cartesian skepticism began with the meditations of a 17th century philosopher and mathematician,
Rene Descartes. In his meditations Descartes lays out three possibilities for our interpretation of
reality, with the final possibility leading to the conclusion that no knowledge of any external objects
is able to be obtained. George Edward Moore lays out his solution to Cartesian skepticism during a
lecture in which he offers a proof as to the existence of external objects by saying, as I make a
certain gesture with the right hand and stating, Here is one hand and adding, as I make a certain
gesture with the left, and here is another. Moore adds that should this simple proof fulfill three
requirements necessary of any careful proof, it can ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However it is my belief that Moore fails to fulfill his second requirement, and therefore cannot
provide a successful refutation of Descartes' claims. This is due to the fact that Moore simply states
that it would be absurd to say that he merely believed his hands to take up the space in which he
says they do, and that he must in fact know that they do. The idea that we are unable to know
anything with certainty is the point that Descartes was attempting to prove in his first meditation.
When looking at the three possibilities Descartes outlined above it is clear to see that under both the
malevolent being and dream scenarios one would be completely unable to answer with certainty that
their hands took up their intended spaces. A malevolent being would have little difficulty placing the
idea that our hands were moving to take up their intended space into our mind, and likewise it is not
difficult to imagine ourselves having a dream in which we moved our hands without our physical
bodies having moved. While the last two possibilities show that Moore should have greater concern
as to the strength of his belief in hand motion, the first possibility that Descartes outlines also
presents potential problems for Moore's

Cartesian Dualist Argument
Suppose that an alien life form from outer space came to earth in a technologically sophisticated
craft and that tests on the creature revealed that it did not possess anything like a brain. Identity
theorists would argue that this creature does not affect the argument on whether or not
consciousness exists. A Cartesian dualist would argue that it is possible for the creature to have a
consciousness because the mind and the body are completely individual of each other. Identity
theorists such as J. J. C. Smart would argue that this creature does not have an impact on the
argument for or against consciousness. Smart argues that a man is a vast arrangement of physical
particles, but there are not, over and above this, sensations or states of consciousness. He ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Nagel argues that as long as there is something that it is to be like that organism, than that organism
can have a consciousness. We can imagine what it is like to not be physical, to not have a body at
all; we just float around in no particular space without the ability to do anything other than think.
Chalmers Zombie argument proposes the logical possibility of a zombie. The type of zombie
Chalmers proposes is unlike Hollywood zombies which tend to be behaviorally impaired or
physically disfigured, but rather are identical to us molecule for molecule. The only difference
between us and our zombies would be the lack of any conscious experience in the zombies. This
suggests that it is logically possible to possess a brain but lack a conscious; the brain and the mind
are independent of each other, and there is nothing it is to be like a Chalmers

Functionalism Vs. Cartesian Dualism
Functionalism, one of the most influential and widespread theories of mind of our day, proposes a
model of human behaviour based on the way certain inputs are processed when the mind is in a
given state, to yield certain outputs. This theory concerns itself only what mental states do, rather
than the substance with which they are made, or whether they exist at all; this is called 'multiple
realizability'. In other words, the theory is ontologically modest, or flexible, and this enables
functionalism to stay compatible with Cartesian dualism or monisms like materialism, an advantage
when other theories lose followers due to their ontological preconceptions. The other notable
strength functionalism claims is that it avoids some of the pitfalls of its counterpart theory,
behaviourism. However each of these apparent strengths has flaws, both in and of themselves and in
comparison to other theories of mind. These strengths and their flaws will be assessed in this essay,
but allow me first to outline what the functionalist theory of mind proposes.
The easiest and most general way to understand the functionalist view is through the example of a
Turing machine. This is an abstract model of a machine, proposed by Alan Turing, which has a tape
that can move infinitely in either direction, a scanner/sensor and a small printer attachment. On the
tape there is a random sequence of symbols or lack thereof. The symbol at a specific point along the
tape, chosen from a finite alphabet of

Cartesian Dichotomy
Through the analyse of the Cartesian division of the mind and the body Bordo (1987) explains how
By Descartes's brilliant stroke, nature became defined by its lack of affiliation with divinity, with
spirit. All that which God–like or spiritual – freedom, will, and sentience – belong entirely and
exclusively to res cogitans. All else – the earth, the heavens, animals, the human body – is merely
mechanically interacting matter. Through this Cartesian masculinization of thought and the murder
of the motherly world–soul, humanity has created a dichotomy between itself and nature, and an
apodictic idea of it's superiority to all other living beings. Through this mechanist view of nature,
society has advocated the belief that nonhuman beings are ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
These pigeons or rats which are seen as pests squatting our territory, should have the right to live
among humans and be considered as Denizens with rights such as secure residency, (Donalson and
Kymlicka, 2011). However this territorial issue does not only include urban areas and animals. What
about the flora? By recognizing the intrinsic rights of all beings, humanity would challenge its entire
traditional geographical perception of the world. Even if humans do not directly inhabit some
places, society still has a huge impact on them through pollution or deforestation or by simply using
natural materials to build their own places. These shadow places (Plumwood, 2008) society uses
are the natural habitats of many species that have the intrinsic right to live there. By recognizing the
sovereignty of wild animals in their habitats as well as respecting wildlife, its flora and fauna in all
places, society would have to turn into an much more eco–conscious community. In my opinion,
based on Val Plumwood's text Has democracy failed ecology? (1996), becoming an eco–conscious
community, respecting the intrinsic rights of all living beings, even the ones society used to consider
as inferior, would have a huge impact on capitalism and liberalism. Indeed, liberalism based on the
interested of privileged citizens and on the persistence of radical inequality and oppression of
marginalized groups, would not function anymore. Consequently, a real democracy – and not the
liberal democracy Plumwood describes in her text – could flourish from the recognition of all living
beings' natural innate rights, following David Gulpilil's idea that We are brothers and sisters of the
world. Doesn't matter if you're bird, snake, fish, kangaroo: One Red

Part 1: An Abbreviated Intellectual History of Thinking About the Mind
In social cognition, theory of mind refers to a person's ability to make causal attributions about other
people's mental states and actions. Though our understanding of the mind has increased in
sophistication with advances in science, the task of reasoning about others in prosaic settings can
probably be said to be the earliest form of cognitive science. Its axioms and fundamental philosophy
have been passed down through the generations in the form of what we might today call folk
psychology. Though folk psychology has many meanings in the literature, here it is used to refer to
the attribution of mental phenomena like beliefs, desires, love, hate, etc. to others in an attempt ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Many simply abandoned the dualist framework, and developed schools of thought that were either
purely idealistic or materialistic. The cartesian separation of mind and body was not only an
ontological debate about what existed in the world, but also one deeply tied to the dialectic between
secular/scientific thought and moral/religious ones. For the church, materialism unsettled their
traditional claim over knowledge about the world. As science offered ever more powerful
explanatory systems for the natural world, cartesian dualism offered a way for theologians to assert
authority over matters of the mind, and by extension, matters of the self and soul. In the face of
biological decline and death, Descartes's mind–body separation also offered a ontological
mechanism by which the human spirit could live on.9
However, by the 19th century, materialism had thoroughly displaced dualism and idealism in
examinations of the mind. In a scientific culture that valued reproducibility and objectivity, a
reliance on subjective experience proved problematic. Subjectivity increasingly
8Searle, John R. A Dozen Problems in the Philosophy of Mind. In Mind: A Brief Introduction.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
9 IBID

Cartesian Persepectivialism In Art
Jay exposes the problems established by the dominant scopic regime, Cartesian perspectivalism (Jay
5–7).
––Eye = Mind
From Richard Rorty's Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature
In the Cartesian model the intellect inspects entities modeled on retinal images. . . In Descartes'
conception––the one that became the basis for 'modrn epistemology––it is representations which are
in the 'mind.'
Cartesian optics fits a scientific world view and becomes the means of thinking about ourselves and
the world around us. It establishes a harmony between the mathematical regularities in optics and
God's will. See Descartes and Linear Perspective.
––Space becomes isotropic, rectilinear, abstract, and uniform. With the visual pyramid between view
and the painting then another between the painting and the vanishing point, the object of study and
the viewer are subjected to Cartesian persepectivialism. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The viewer is outside the viewed scene and captures an eternal moment.
What is Lost in such Perception? (Jay 8–9)
1. The withdrawal of the painter's emotional entanglement
2. de–contextualization. as abstract, quantitatively conceptualized space became more interesting to
the artist than the qualitatively differentiated subjects painted within it, the rendering of the scene
became and end in itself.
3. The visual field shown on the canvas becomes a portable commodity.
Assumptions about the Viewer (Jay

Examples Of Cartesian Rationalism
Cartesian rationalism was founded by Rene Descartes who was a philosopher born 1596–1650. He
is a metaphysical realist. The Cartesian rationalism deals with skepticism, methodic doubt and
methodological skepticism. Rationalism is the idea that real knowledge can only be known through
reason. (Frame, 2014) Descartes believes that the mind is independent of the body. The mind just
like the soul lives on as the body perishes. He also believed that the only way knowledge is reliable
is by understanding reason through the mind. Are senses unreliable? Descartes questions if the
things we see might be an illusion such as water in a desert.
An example of this is the beeswax that Descartes tested. He wanted to test if his senses could be
relied upon ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He did the exact thing Descartes did, solved one problem and created another problem. He believed
the mind–body problem could be solved by thinking and extension. These would be considered
characteristics of God. To back up his idea he came up with a solution. If God is a single substance
with two attributes–thinking and extension–then the characteristics associated with being a thinking
substance and those of being an extended substance are not separate and distinct, as they were for
Descartes. (Mitchell, 2015) As our minds and body are interrelated Spinoza viewed them as the
same. In his consideration the body is an aspect of the mind as well as the mind is the idea of the

Basic Guiding Principles From California Common Core State...
Final Exam (30 points)
Name: __Jacqueline Medrano__________ ID: __022231165____
Constructed Response (5 points/each)
1. List Mathematical Guiding Principles from California Common Core State Standards for
Mathematics (CA CCSSM) and describe in your own words the importance of these principles
– Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them– The importance of this principle is that
students must be able to deeply understand a problem by themselves this ensure that the student can
analyze the problem and plan on how the will solve it.
Reason abstractly and quantitatively– It's important that students are able to pause during solving
the problem and continue to analyze, reflect and strategize for the solution as needed.
Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others– it's important for students to be
able to explain and be able to discuss the process into which they believe a problem should be
solved this demonstrates the students understanding on the concept. They should be able to clarify
and answer any questions that arise about the problem once again displaying a deeper understanding
then just being able to memorize formulas/steps and solving a problem.
Model with mathematics– the importance of this principle is to always be able to relate math
problems into real world scenarios for example being able to utilize math to remodel a bathroom.
Use appropriate tools strategically– it's important for students to know and understand when,

What Is Cartesian Geometry
Families of Polar Curves: Unique and Countless More often then not, Cartesian coordinates can be
found throughout the world of mathematics. This system is heavily applied in calculus as it utilizes
the x–y grid and provides defined positions on a graphic, only allowing for one representation of
each point. However, this system can be converted into the polar coordinate system, which utilizes
the knowledge of r and . The system of polar equations can arguably be more useful than Cartesian
coordinates when discussing circular motion and fields as it permits each point on a graph to have
more then just one representation. Polar equations become more practical to use when describing
objects that are centrosymmetric and when objects are placed in ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
After spending some time looking at the countless possible outcomes that a polar equation can have,
I found that there are several factors that actively make a curve look the way it looks. First off, using
advanced trigonometric identities as well as utilizing varies numbers and powers can change a curve
in order to present a radically different outcome then what has been examined. The Conchoid of
Nicomedes (Figure 5) is an interesting graph that represents something previously unseen. Secondly,
unknown polar curves also become apparent when placing equations in the graphing calculator. By
using already understood polar curves, one could create a unique curve by adding different
variables. One example of this can be seen in Figure 6 which has no classification, but that I believe
looks similar to a shell. Lastly, polar curves heavily depend on the area of which they are being
observed. This means that certain windows can give a different perspective of the same curve. After
messing with the bounds of the curve two very distinct graphics were experienced and are depicted
in Figure 7 that shows the standard view and fixed view. This fascinating picture shows the
individuality of polar equations and how they can be useful in more then

Kant's Refutation Of Cartesian Idealism
Problems with Kant's Refutation of Cartesian Idealism
Immanuel Kant's refutation of cartesian idealism, while certainly aesthetically pleasing, and perhaps
convincing at first glance, doesn't hold up well upon further inspection, particularly so, when
attempting to change the minds of hard skeptics. Kant states that In the preceding proof, one
becomes aware that the game that idealism played is being turned around and against it. (B276) By
this, Kant means to describe a process in which he reverses Descartes' traditional view: rather than
inner sense being the root of inference for all outer objects, Kant claims that the existence of objects
becomes the root for which our inner sense can be accurately determined. In fact, he says this ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It isn't impossible to conceive of a world where we are insane, or somehow handicapped in our
perceptions of time. From the perspective of others, they would see us, an individual, as a madman
who was erroneously (but vividly) imagining a continuous medium (I.e., time) from which all
events occur within sequentially, as is described by Kant in the second analogy of the transcendental
logic: If, in an appearance containing an occurrence, I call A the preceding state of the perception
and B the succeeding state, then B can in apprehension only succeed A, and similarly perception A
cannot succeed B, but only precede it.

My definition of Cartesian dualism is the belief of an afterlife. Believing that your soul is not the
same substance as your body. Cartesian dualism consists of two parts, the mind and the body being
independent, but casually interacting with one another. The mind can influence the body, and the
body can affect the mind, but they are distinct in their separate positions. Descartes argues this
theory by implying the nature of mind as a thinking thing being completely different from the body
as a non–thinking thing and that it is possible for one to exist without the other. The mind and body
are both substances, substances are things that can exist alone without anything else. He explains the
properties as breaking them down into primary attributes ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
He uses the wax example described in meditation 2 comparing the awareness of himself to his
awareness of wax. He states For if I judge that the wax exists from the fact that I see it, clearly this
same fact entails much more evidently that I myself also exist. It is possible that what I see is not
really the wax; it is possible that I do not even have eyes with which to see anything. (Descartes
Mediation 2) He is contradicting his delusional ideas of doubt about his existence to help understand
the common sense position. There is a metaphysical connection between the mind and the body, so
he does not go by what the eye sees, but more of what the soul sees beyond what is directly in front
of you. He uses the third mediations to characterize what it is to be epistemic describing it as clear
and distinct perception. The basis for perception and clear judgement is the evidence he used to
understand an epistemic view. (Plato.Stanford.edu) Descartes belief that the mind and body interact
could be seen as just an illusion, but the fact that he used his thought process and him questioning
his identity to defer whether it is possible for the mind and body to be separate substances explains
his perceptual experiences and how it is plausible. I think that it is an accurate theory because of the
dependence on the mind and the dependence we have on the body.

Examples Of Cartesian Dualism
1. What is Cartesian dualism?
– Cartesian Dualism is a term that was originated in Greek philosophy that refer to as a theory or
system of thought that regards a domain of reality in terms of two independent principles which are
the mind/soul and body. Rene Descartes reinforced this concept and gave it a name, dualism due to
the mind, body, and soul. In other word, Rene Descartes determined that the information comes
through the brain and sent to soul. Cartesian is a term that relates to the French philosopher Rene
Descartes, his ideas, and philosophy theory. Cartesian dualism refers to Rene Descartes concept of
dualism. Rene Descartes famous quote, cogito ergo sum, meant I reflect therefore I am. deals
with dualism. Rene Descartes thought ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Peter Strawson explains the difficulty for the Cartesian dualism first with the predication difficulty.
In Peter Strawson argument, he suggested that the Cartesian dualism is committed to thinking that
there is a philosophically more revealing way of talking about people than our everyday way. Peter
Strawson implied that if a human being was really two things of the same then when a predicate is
ascribed to a human being, might be best expressed with two subject–predicate sentences one of
them having a soul as subject, the other having a body as subject. Peter Strawson thinks, the
Cartesian dualist ought to be able to show that they can reduce statements about persons into
statements about souls and statements about bodies. Peter Strawson's main argument can be called
the identity and numerical ability argument. For the notion of a Cartesian mind or soul to make
sense it must be possible for specify criteria of singularity and identity for souls. Peter Strawson's
claim to Cartesian dualism we must know the difference between one such item and two and
identify the same item at different time. Peter Strawson claim towards Cartesian dualism is that no
individual really realizes the concept of a person, their mind, or soul

The Cartesian Standard Of Justification: A Case Study
Misplacing items happens to every individual throughout their lives. For Melissa, she happened to
misplace her keys. In order to find her keys, Melissa must know something about them. It is in my
view that Melissa does not know anything about her keys because she lacks a process for finding
them and does not show she cares to find them. Given the scenario, there is a plausible belief that
Melissa has concerning the whereabouts of her keys. The belief is that her keys are somewhere in
her house. We know this belief is true because, at the end of the scenario, Melissa pulls her keys out
of the coffee table drawer. For Melissa, the belief is plausible as she could have wasted time
searching her house when her keys were not actually there. In order for the belief to be true, it must
be justified. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Cartesian standard of justification requires indubitability to determine whether the belief is
justified. If a belief is indubitable, a foundation can be built upon that belief using reason (Descartes
1). The only indubitable belief Melissa has–according to Descartes–is that she exists as a thinking
thing (Descartes 5). With that, the belief concerning the whereabouts of her keys is not justified. As
a thinking thing, we can be deceived by knowledge. This occurs because the reason behind that
knowledge can be incorrect and therefore, betray us (Descartes 2). Melissa could have let a friend
borrow her car and she did not remember it. Or, she could have been in an accident a few days
earlier and is suffering from a concussion. Both of these situations are plausible explanations for
how Melissa can be deceived by knowledge. Ordinary justification is another method for
determining whether the belief is justified or

The Cartesian Circle Essay
Descartes' Cartesian Circle
Descartes' Cartesian Circle has come under fire from countless philosophers because it supposedly
commits a logical fallacy with its circular reasoning. In his second Meditation, Descartes attempts to
prove the existence of God. He states that clear and distinct perception leads to knowledge, and that
God's existence is apparent and obvious because of things we have come to perceive as knowledge.
Furthermore, he asserts that we cannot turn these perceptions into knowledge without the assurance
that God exists. Essentially, Descartes claims that God is a necessary condition for knowledge,
which in turn requires the existence of God. This circular logic presents a problematic scenario
similar to the chicken ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In one publication James Van Cleve writes about a philosopher named Willis Doney who advocates
a solution to the Cartesian Circle called the Memory Gambit. Doney's analysis reveals that
Descartes says that if I remember clearly and distinctly perceiving something that I do not now
clearly and distinctly perceive, I can be certain of it if and only if I know that God exists (Cleve,
56). Doney proposes that an atheist can learn and ascertain knowledge about subjects such as math
if he clearly perceives them at the time. Whether or not he retains that knowledge or is able to erase
doubt regarding that knowledge is entirely dependent on his comprehension of God's existence.
Doney's interpretation therefore is that the function of God is only to guarantee the accuracy of one's
memory, rather than regulate the transition from a perception to a piece of knowledge. In other
words, without a certainty that God exists, one is merely trapped in a moment, and can only be
certain of things perceived at any one given time. By denying one of the premises that form the
Cartesian Circle, it is possible to circumvent the logical fallacy originally committed. Following in
the steps of the first defense is one that seeks to disprove Descartes' second premise: in order to
know that God exists, one must first have a certainty that what they perceive is truly knowledge. Van
Cleve sheds some light on this by

Cartesian dualism, or mind–body dualism is the doctrine that thinking beings possess immaterial
souls entirely distinct from their physical bodies. Rene Descartes conceived this idea in response to
the questions that metaphysics seeks to answer: What is it for an entity to possess a mind? What
does it mean when an individual refers to a creature as having a mind? In the Fourth Set of
Objections, Antoine Arnauld writes an argument that is meant to undermine Descartes' argument for
dualism. The main idea of cartesian dualism is that one's ability to clearly and distinctly conceive of
mind and body warrants the inference to the notion that minds and bodies are separable. More
specifically, Cartesian dualism is based on the premise that if an individual can clearly and
distinctly understand one thing apart from other, than that is sufficient evidence for him to conclude
that the two things are distinct. Using this intuition, Descartes concludes that his soul is distinct
from his body, since he has a clear and distinct idea of himself (his own soul) as well as a clear and
distinct idea of his body. He adds the assertion that it is possible for him to exist without his body,
since it is an extended, non–thinking thing. According to Cartesian dualism, minds are thinking
things and are not located in physical space. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The mere fact that Descartes can conceive of some state of affairs does not prove that the state of
affairs is at all possible. In other words, conceivability does not entail possibility. Because of this,
Descartes' conceivability argument therefore involves an illegitimate train of thought: I can
conceive myself existing without my body entails conceivability, while the phrase It is possible for
me to exist without my body entails possibility. This ultimately is the reasoning behind Arnauld's

Father of Modern thought and mental symbol of how many western thinkers today process the
world they live in, Rene Descartes, developed a dualistic way of thought that steals the attention
away from other modes of further developed thought now held in Post–Modernistic and even
contemporary types of viewing reality. His theory of Cartesian dualism of thought brings about two
distinct realities people, supposedly to Descartes, inhabit throughout their daily lives. These include
the existence of a Res Cogitans, the domain of thinking things, and a Res Extensa, the domain of
matter or exterior world. This split creates causal paradigms in cultures that begin to pick one
domain over the other wherein hopefully this paper will inspect the shift in ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The immediate intake of information solidifies much of Descartes' idea of Res Cogitans and Res
Extensa. The phone itself acting as a tool of thought transport, where little to no effort is required in
receiving information, play the part of Res Extensa. The kinds of information most readily
processed from phones such as twitter, Facebook, snapchat, email, and other quick forms of staying
up to date act as the Res Extensa. The act of one looking down at a screen, unaware of the current
world around them minus the phone itself and notifications popping up on screen will act as
consistent representationalism. Thinking that the reality created in the mind, when staring at the
phone, is ultimately and equally relevant to the world happening around them represents
interactionalism occurring. With phones being a cornerstone symbol for how successful materialism
has become, it would make sense that other frames of mind such as modernistic thinking patterns
have also seeped their way into current society as to influence culture as

Ducking In Cartesian Theatre
Let's now return to the opening question: what is the product of perception? This question may have
seemed at first like a good question to ask, but it gets one off on the wrong foot because it
presupposes that perceptual processes have a single kind of product. To presuppose this, however, is
already to commit oneself to the Cartesian Theater. There are in fact many different ways of turning
the corner, or responding to the given, and only a few of them are pictorial (or for that matter
sentential) in any sense at all. For instance, when something looms swiftly in the visual field, one
tends to duck. Ducking is one sort of taking. It itself is not remotely pictorial or propositional; the
behaviour is not a speech act; it does not express

Cartesian Dualism: Theories Of The Mind
Substance dualism, or Cartesian dualism, is a theory of the mind which separates the mind from the
body by having two substances: material, of the body; and immaterial, of the mind. The body cannot
think, but is able to perceive and interact with the material world directly. On the other hand, the
mind is immaterial and is, instead, only connected to the physical world through the body. The mind
exists in an independent and secluded state. While the body cannot think, therefore function, without
the mind, the mind only needs the body to explore the material world. Minds are unable to interact
directly with each other, the body must interact with another body to convey the intentions of the
mind. By accepting substance dualism, our ability to explain consciousness, or self–awareness, is far
more advanced than with any form of physicalism. If we consider the mind independently observing
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, during most human activities, the self–analytics of the mind tend to remain quiet, and we
instead live in a state where the mind and body can easily be interchangeable. This second
observation appears to side against dualism, or, at least, give us pause to too quickly assume it is the
case, but it fails to account for orthodox cases. For example, in instances of disabilities such as
dissociative disorders, the individual will completely separate from their body, and, at times, have
memory loss concerning the events occurring during the separation. In war veterans, their PTSD can
result in them losing rational agency and acting out violently. This can be easily defined in dualism
as a malfunction between the connection of the mind and body. Without the mind in

The Mind Body Problem And Cartesian Dualism
Dayna Gelman
Justin Pannell
April 24, 2015
PHI 107
The Mind–Body Problem and Cartesian Dualism
In this paper I will argue for Cartesian dualism to be the most plausible solution to the mind–body
problem. Cartesian dualism argues that there is a two–way interaction between mental and physical
substances. Renee Descartes, the creator of the theory, believed that a man consisted of matter, the
physical things that walk and talk etc., and mind, the nonphysical substance (often correlated with
the soul) that thinks, doubts, remembers, etc. The first argument in Cartesian Dualism is the
Argument from doubt. We are supposed to be following Descartes along his meditations in the
search for something metaphysically certain. Descartes starts by ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Hence, there is no conceivable consistent story I can tell myself in which I fail to exist. Therefore,
the Cogito is metaphysically certain, that just one thing...certain and unshakeable. As mentioned
before, Descartes proposes that the mind and body are two separate and distinct entities. In another
argument, Descartes reasoning is,
If we can exist without bodies, then we cannot be bodies. We can exist without bodies. Therefore,
we cannot be bodies.
This is often called the 'modal argument' for substance dualism. It has this name because it
correlates directly to the possibility of a mind or person existing without a body. Applying this to the
mind–body debate we can say the following. Other philosophers and theorist's claim that the mind
and body are identical, therefore one cannot exist without the other. However in contrast, if the mind
and body are not identical, as substance dualists claim, then one can exist without the other. Finally,
my last major argument for substance dualism is religion. Each of the major religions places a strong
belief in life after death, and that there is an immortal soul that will survive death. This very closely
resembles substance dualism. The mind can essentially be interchanged for the immortal soul. This
argument is primarily the basis for my own belief in substance dualism. My personal experiences
growing up in a Methodist family has provided me with insight and believability for this argument.
If one believes

Cartesian Dualism And The Body Essay
How many people have really thought about what the mind is? How is the mind connected to the
body? Are they two separate things or are the body and the mind the same thing? There are different
theories to answer these questions. A philosopher, Descarte, believes in Cartesian Dualism, which is
that the mind and body both exist, but are two distinct things: physical stuff and mental stuff. The
mind is not located in physical space and is an immaterial soul, whereas the body is a physical being
and these two things are separate. This means that the mind is a non–material thing that includes our
consciousness and soul. Basically, our body and brain are a container that holds our actual self
which is our mind. The mind, spirit, and soul are immaterial and interact with our bodies. The
opposite view of Cartesian Dualism is called materialism. This says that the spirit does not exist
because everything that exists is made from physical materials, such as the brain and the human
mind. Our body and mind are the same thing. Although Descarte believes in Cartesian Dualism,
there are many arguments for and against it. One argument that is against it is called the Continuity
of Nature Argument against Cartesian Dualism. This argument describes that nature is a continuous
thing. For instance, being tan is a very vague characteristic and it's on a continuous scale. There is
no sharp boundary of tan people and pale people. There can be a grey area. There are degrees of
being tan.

Cartesian Dualism Argument
In this assignment I look at Descartes Cartesian Dualism, I critically appraise the claims within this
argument and use other philosophers such as Plato to back up his argument. I discuss the flaw in his
argument and provide alternative argument to back up my claims. Descartes schooling taught him
about 'matter' according to the teachings of Aristotle, he argued that 'things are not constructed by
matter' and that 'form is what matter acquires when an object comes into being' (Descartes et
al,1996, pp.VIII). Descartes sixth meditation is where he argued Cartesian Dualism, his claim was
'there is a vast difference between mind and body...body is always divisible, and that mind is entirely
indivisible' (Descartes, 2013, pp.129). His argument ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, if this was to be done by all students in a classroom setting, it may create some chaos,
there would not be enough time to answer the questions of every child and to have each one
satisfied. Teachers may feel under pressure to always have an argument prepared, constant
questioning in this type of education system, would not work and teachers would constantly feel

Comparing Two Cartesian Cookies
The analogy is a bad one, because it can convey the essence of classes and objects if you apply the
right mental mapping, but that mapping is not obvious to arrive at, and perhaps not even the most
convincing one.
A class is like a cookie–cutter in that it has the power to create multiple items that are alike in some
ways: they all have the same number and type of fields, while their values can differ. You can
compare this to all cookies having the same shape, but it is unclear how the differences between
individual cookies map to the differences between objects that are class–mates; in my mind, two
Cartesian coordinates with different X and Y values are much more different than similar, certainly
much less alike than two cookies with the

The Cartesian Circle is Wrong
Rene Descartes meditations on the existence of God are very profound, thought–provoking, and
engaging. From the meditations focused specifically on the existence of God, Descartes uses the
argument that based on his clear and distinct perception that cannot be treated with doubt, God does
exist. In the beginning of the third meditation, Descartes proclaims that he is certain he is a thinking
thing based on his clear and distinct perception, and he couldn't be certain unless all clear and
distinct perceptions are true. Before diving into the existence of God, Descartes introduces smaller
arguments to prove the existence of God. For example, Descartes introduces in his argument that
there are ideas in which he possess that exists outside of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The reason we cannot doubt the existence of God is because of clear and distinct perceptions that
God exist. To conclude, because of clear and distinct perception, Descartes conveys that God exists.
Though his argument seems intriguing, Descartes argument has been treated with dubious
standpoints. The reason of doubt, better known as the Cartesian circle, argues that Descartes goes
against his own word. The foundation of the Cartesian Circle consists of the argument that Descartes
can only know that God exists and is not a deceiver if he knows that his clear and distinct
perceptions are true. But he can only know that his clear and distinct perceptions are true only if he
knows that God exists and is not a deceiver. This circularity comes from the basic fact that one hand
believers of this circularity cites that Descartes states that we must rely on clear and distinct
perceptions in order to prove that God exists; however, on the other hand, believers also proclaim
that Descartes convey God must exist in order for him to develop the clear and distinct perceptions
that he exists and is not a deceiver. Now that both sides have been introduced, the focus of this paper
is to speak on Descartes meditations about the existence of God, and the Cartesian circle. The
standpoint I will be taking is to prove that the Cartesian circle has overemphasized the claim that
Descartes is using circularity, and that this claim should be disregarded.
Descartes

Cartesian Coordinate Equations

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Monica Carter

More from Monica Carter (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Cartesian Coordinate Equations