This document summarizes Spinoza's mind-body monism and its advantages over Cartesian dualism. It discusses how Descartes proposed a dualist view of the mind and body as distinct substances that interact in some unclear way. Later philosophers like Leibniz and Malebranche tried to explain this interaction but did not fully resolve the issue. Spinoza alone proposed monism, where the mind and body are two attributes of a single substance and are not distinct. This avoids the problem of how two distinct things could interact. The document argues that Spinoza's view aligns better with empiricism and growing scientific evidence that mental states arise from physical processes in the brain.
Thinking about Thought - Theories of Brain Mind Consciusness - Part 1: Philosophy of Mind & Cognitive Psychology. I keep updating these slides at http://www.scaruffi.com/ucb.html
Dialectic Approach in the Psychology by Jose RP in Psychology and Psychothera...CrimsonpublishersPPrs
Dialectic Approach in the Psychology by Jose RP in Psychology and Psychotherapy Research Study: Crimson Publishers_Journal of Psychology and Psychotherapy
Thinking about Thought - Theories of Brain Mind Consciusness - Part 1: Philosophy of Mind & Cognitive Psychology. I keep updating these slides at http://www.scaruffi.com/ucb.html
Dialectic Approach in the Psychology by Jose RP in Psychology and Psychothera...CrimsonpublishersPPrs
Dialectic Approach in the Psychology by Jose RP in Psychology and Psychotherapy Research Study: Crimson Publishers_Journal of Psychology and Psychotherapy
We here try to apply the concept of Possible/Parallel Worlds from Logic, which came to our knowledge through the hands of Graham Priest, and through a French movie, to Psychiatry. We think this concept is ideal because we can make use of mathematical elements to draw theories of control, and diagnosis, and therefore also therapeutic theories. We will make use of the new model of psyche proposed by us to expand on a few items. Perhaps the best use of this paper is empowering the professionals of Psychiatry, and Psychology by providing new tools for their studies, and work. The main focus is the human psyche. In order to explain the World of God, Inner Reality, and Outer Reality, which are divisions that are obtained from applying the concept of parallel worlds to the studies on the human psyche, we end up paying a light, and perhaps, an enlightening, visit to the concepts of schizophrenia, autism, Down Syndrome, and psychopathy.
Sequel to "Transcending Death during COVID-19" Are scientific world-views con...Paul H. Carr
Religions people are more accepting of NDEs than scientists
For theologian Paul Tillich, "Our lives are limited in time but fulfilled by eternity. When we die, we return to the eternity from which we came."
What is eternity?
For Tillich, eternity is not unlimited time, but a dimension beyond time that enables us to to sense events as happening in temporal sequence.
"For the things that are seen are temporal, but things that are unseen are eternal" (Paul's Letter to II Corinthians.)
For Greeks like Pythagoras and Plato, mathematical relations are eternal, beautiful, and cosmic. Is God a mathematician?
For physicist-philosopher Paul H. Carr, beauty is a delicate dance between our subjective consciousness and the objective mathematical relationships that maintain the universe and life.
NDEs give evidence of out-of-body consciousness.
What is consciousness?
Cosmologist MIT Prof Max Tegman believes consciousness will increasingly be realized as mathematical patterns.
Consciousness for us is what information processing feels like, but this is not only material.
Anthropologist Berkley Prof Terry Deacon, believes that consciousness emerges from the firing of brain neurons but cannot be reduced to them.
Is the material world the ultimate, ontological reality? What about energy, and Spirit?
Religious Spirit is similar to scientific energy. We don't observe them directly, but infer their existence as a way of unifying complex phenomena.
Science's emergence to answer HOW is converging beautifully with religion's synthesis to answer WHY.
Rural Library Services: Lessons from Five Rural Public Libraries in West Bengalinventionjournals
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI) is an international journal intended for professionals and researchers in all fields of Humanities and Social Science. IJHSSI publishes research articles and reviews within the whole field Humanities and Social Science, new teaching methods, assessment, validation and the impact of new technologies and it will continue to provide information on the latest trends and developments in this ever-expanding subject. The publications of papers are selected through double peer reviewed to ensure originality, relevance, and readability. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online.
Equation of everything i.e. Quantum Fields: the Real Building Blocks of the U...inventionjournals
Mind, the inner most box of nature has not been investigated by modern physicists .Mind has not been incorporated in Standard model. Mind can only be studied by participatory science. Having searched Basic building blocks of the universe i.e. mass part of reality, we have also investigated mind part of reality and finally two fundamental particles with mind and mass realities are hypothesized . Now we discuss how to further investigate mind so as to know their structures and functions. Atomic genetics is the branch of science where we investigate about fundamental interactions of the universe i.e. atomic transcription and translations. New words have been coined to understand hidden science of mind part of reality. Mind reality have been recognized as different faces by “I” about 5000 years back to Arjuna in Mahabharata. It is just like to understand any language through Alphabets. These are (different faces) Alphabets of mind reality. One Mind reality has one face identity and the second mind reality has second face identity and so on. The facial expression represents phenomenon of intelligence and different face represents different types of properties carrying property. The open eyes means property is activated while close eye means property is inactivated. In spite of carrying properties conscious ness they also know how to conduct not only origin of universe but also how to create two different universe i.e. next creation could be different from this creation. In all, It is automatic system of the universe. The mind realities which are of good properties have devtas face identity (first five faces on both side and those mind realities which are of bad properties have demons face identity ( last four faces on both side) . These are named as code PCPs or messenger atomic genes. The central face is CCP or Thought script where all thoughts of the universe are banked. It is bank of data of all information s of the universe It is face identity of Anti mind particles as data of all information’s of the universe are stored as anti mind particles . It is the Time mind ness (biological clock) that keeps on expressing different thoughts from this thought script (CCP). There are four more faces (black bodies) shown on extreme left and right floating in fire are CPs (translating Atomic genes). That translates the messages and realizes it and reacts accordingly. Rest pictures are creation of different individuals and nature (sun, moon and snake and other pictures made on hands and body) by different thoughts of Almighty B.B.B. The entire picture has been explained in Geeta in 11/ 10 and 11.Whatever is being created in this universe is basically not by our thoughts rather it is the thought of Almighty B.B.B (Yang B.B.B or matter B.B.B. or Male B.B.B working as Highest center of the universe. ) that is dominated over creation and destruction of this cycle of the universe. Hence the World of Everyday Experience, in One Equation is Myth.
aesthetics:a philosophy of art / the recovery of virtues and principles -int...derek dey
A short introduction to aesthetics. The philosophy of art described here is defined by universals, the recent advances in the psychology of creativity and innate character and calling. Aesthetics is a series containing 1. the Introduction. 2. The Psychology of the Creative Self. 3. The Philosophy of Art, and 4. Models of Education. Contact the author for slide supported presentations at derekdey@gmail.com
Matter, mind and higher dimensions – Bernard CarrLex Pit
Prof Bernard Carr
Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy
School of Physics and Astronomy
Queen Mary, University of London
Astronomer and mathematician Bernard Carr theorizes that many of the phenomena we experience but cannot explain within the physical laws of this dimension actually occur in other dimensions.
Albert Einstein stated that there are at least four dimensions. The fourth dimension is time, or spacetime, since Einstein said space and time cannot be separated. In modern physics, theories about the existence of up to 11 dimensions and the possibility of more have gained traction.
Carr, a professor of mathematics and astronomy at Queen Mary University of London, says our consciousness interacts with another dimension. Furthermore, the multi-dimensional universe he envisions has a hierarchical structure. We are at the lowest-level dimension.
“The model resolves well-known philosophical problems concerning the relationship between matter and mind, elucidates the nature of time, and provides an ontological framework for the interpretation of phenomena such as apparitions, OBEs [out-of-body experiences], NDEs [near-death-experiences], and dreams,” he wrote in a conference abstract.
Carr reasons that our physical sensors only show us a 3-dimensional universe, though there are actually at least four dimensions. What exists in the higher dimensions are entities we cannot touch with our physical sensors. He said that such entities must still have a type of space to exist in.
“The only non-physical entities in the universe of which we have any experience are mental ones, and … the existence of paranormal phenomena suggests that mental entities have to exist in some sort of space,” Carr wrote.
The other-dimensional space we enter in dreams overlaps with the space where memory exists. Carr says telepathy signals a communal mental space and clairvoyance also contains a physical space. “Non-physical percepts have attributes of externality,” he wrote in his book “Matter, Mind, and Higher Dimensions.”
He builds on previous theories, including the Kaluza–Klein theory, which unifies the fundamental forces of gravitation and electromagnetism. The Kaluza–Klein theory also envisions a 5-dimensional space.
In “M-theory,” there are 11 dimensions. In superstring theory, there are 10. Carr understands this as a 4-dimensional “external” space—meaning these are the four dimensions in Einstein’s relativity theory—and a 6- or 7-dimensional “internal” space—meaning these dimensions relate to psychic and other “intangible” phenomena.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI)inventionjournals
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI) is an international journal intended for professionals and researchers in all fields of Humanities and Social Science. IJHSSI publishes research articles and reviews within the whole field Humanities and Social Science, new teaching methods, assessment, validation and the impact of new technologies and it will continue to provide information on the latest trends and developments in this ever-expanding subject. The publications of papers are selected through double peer reviewed to ensure originality, relevance, and readability. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online
We here try to apply the concept of Possible/Parallel Worlds from Logic, which came to our knowledge through the hands of Graham Priest, and through a French movie, to Psychiatry. We think this concept is ideal because we can make use of mathematical elements to draw theories of control, and diagnosis, and therefore also therapeutic theories. We will make use of the new model of psyche proposed by us to expand on a few items. Perhaps the best use of this paper is empowering the professionals of Psychiatry, and Psychology by providing new tools for their studies, and work. The main focus is the human psyche. In order to explain the World of God, Inner Reality, and Outer Reality, which are divisions that are obtained from applying the concept of parallel worlds to the studies on the human psyche, we end up paying a light, and perhaps, an enlightening, visit to the concepts of schizophrenia, autism, Down Syndrome, and psychopathy.
Sequel to "Transcending Death during COVID-19" Are scientific world-views con...Paul H. Carr
Religions people are more accepting of NDEs than scientists
For theologian Paul Tillich, "Our lives are limited in time but fulfilled by eternity. When we die, we return to the eternity from which we came."
What is eternity?
For Tillich, eternity is not unlimited time, but a dimension beyond time that enables us to to sense events as happening in temporal sequence.
"For the things that are seen are temporal, but things that are unseen are eternal" (Paul's Letter to II Corinthians.)
For Greeks like Pythagoras and Plato, mathematical relations are eternal, beautiful, and cosmic. Is God a mathematician?
For physicist-philosopher Paul H. Carr, beauty is a delicate dance between our subjective consciousness and the objective mathematical relationships that maintain the universe and life.
NDEs give evidence of out-of-body consciousness.
What is consciousness?
Cosmologist MIT Prof Max Tegman believes consciousness will increasingly be realized as mathematical patterns.
Consciousness for us is what information processing feels like, but this is not only material.
Anthropologist Berkley Prof Terry Deacon, believes that consciousness emerges from the firing of brain neurons but cannot be reduced to them.
Is the material world the ultimate, ontological reality? What about energy, and Spirit?
Religious Spirit is similar to scientific energy. We don't observe them directly, but infer their existence as a way of unifying complex phenomena.
Science's emergence to answer HOW is converging beautifully with religion's synthesis to answer WHY.
Rural Library Services: Lessons from Five Rural Public Libraries in West Bengalinventionjournals
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI) is an international journal intended for professionals and researchers in all fields of Humanities and Social Science. IJHSSI publishes research articles and reviews within the whole field Humanities and Social Science, new teaching methods, assessment, validation and the impact of new technologies and it will continue to provide information on the latest trends and developments in this ever-expanding subject. The publications of papers are selected through double peer reviewed to ensure originality, relevance, and readability. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online.
Equation of everything i.e. Quantum Fields: the Real Building Blocks of the U...inventionjournals
Mind, the inner most box of nature has not been investigated by modern physicists .Mind has not been incorporated in Standard model. Mind can only be studied by participatory science. Having searched Basic building blocks of the universe i.e. mass part of reality, we have also investigated mind part of reality and finally two fundamental particles with mind and mass realities are hypothesized . Now we discuss how to further investigate mind so as to know their structures and functions. Atomic genetics is the branch of science where we investigate about fundamental interactions of the universe i.e. atomic transcription and translations. New words have been coined to understand hidden science of mind part of reality. Mind reality have been recognized as different faces by “I” about 5000 years back to Arjuna in Mahabharata. It is just like to understand any language through Alphabets. These are (different faces) Alphabets of mind reality. One Mind reality has one face identity and the second mind reality has second face identity and so on. The facial expression represents phenomenon of intelligence and different face represents different types of properties carrying property. The open eyes means property is activated while close eye means property is inactivated. In spite of carrying properties conscious ness they also know how to conduct not only origin of universe but also how to create two different universe i.e. next creation could be different from this creation. In all, It is automatic system of the universe. The mind realities which are of good properties have devtas face identity (first five faces on both side and those mind realities which are of bad properties have demons face identity ( last four faces on both side) . These are named as code PCPs or messenger atomic genes. The central face is CCP or Thought script where all thoughts of the universe are banked. It is bank of data of all information s of the universe It is face identity of Anti mind particles as data of all information’s of the universe are stored as anti mind particles . It is the Time mind ness (biological clock) that keeps on expressing different thoughts from this thought script (CCP). There are four more faces (black bodies) shown on extreme left and right floating in fire are CPs (translating Atomic genes). That translates the messages and realizes it and reacts accordingly. Rest pictures are creation of different individuals and nature (sun, moon and snake and other pictures made on hands and body) by different thoughts of Almighty B.B.B. The entire picture has been explained in Geeta in 11/ 10 and 11.Whatever is being created in this universe is basically not by our thoughts rather it is the thought of Almighty B.B.B (Yang B.B.B or matter B.B.B. or Male B.B.B working as Highest center of the universe. ) that is dominated over creation and destruction of this cycle of the universe. Hence the World of Everyday Experience, in One Equation is Myth.
aesthetics:a philosophy of art / the recovery of virtues and principles -int...derek dey
A short introduction to aesthetics. The philosophy of art described here is defined by universals, the recent advances in the psychology of creativity and innate character and calling. Aesthetics is a series containing 1. the Introduction. 2. The Psychology of the Creative Self. 3. The Philosophy of Art, and 4. Models of Education. Contact the author for slide supported presentations at derekdey@gmail.com
Matter, mind and higher dimensions – Bernard CarrLex Pit
Prof Bernard Carr
Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy
School of Physics and Astronomy
Queen Mary, University of London
Astronomer and mathematician Bernard Carr theorizes that many of the phenomena we experience but cannot explain within the physical laws of this dimension actually occur in other dimensions.
Albert Einstein stated that there are at least four dimensions. The fourth dimension is time, or spacetime, since Einstein said space and time cannot be separated. In modern physics, theories about the existence of up to 11 dimensions and the possibility of more have gained traction.
Carr, a professor of mathematics and astronomy at Queen Mary University of London, says our consciousness interacts with another dimension. Furthermore, the multi-dimensional universe he envisions has a hierarchical structure. We are at the lowest-level dimension.
“The model resolves well-known philosophical problems concerning the relationship between matter and mind, elucidates the nature of time, and provides an ontological framework for the interpretation of phenomena such as apparitions, OBEs [out-of-body experiences], NDEs [near-death-experiences], and dreams,” he wrote in a conference abstract.
Carr reasons that our physical sensors only show us a 3-dimensional universe, though there are actually at least four dimensions. What exists in the higher dimensions are entities we cannot touch with our physical sensors. He said that such entities must still have a type of space to exist in.
“The only non-physical entities in the universe of which we have any experience are mental ones, and … the existence of paranormal phenomena suggests that mental entities have to exist in some sort of space,” Carr wrote.
The other-dimensional space we enter in dreams overlaps with the space where memory exists. Carr says telepathy signals a communal mental space and clairvoyance also contains a physical space. “Non-physical percepts have attributes of externality,” he wrote in his book “Matter, Mind, and Higher Dimensions.”
He builds on previous theories, including the Kaluza–Klein theory, which unifies the fundamental forces of gravitation and electromagnetism. The Kaluza–Klein theory also envisions a 5-dimensional space.
In “M-theory,” there are 11 dimensions. In superstring theory, there are 10. Carr understands this as a 4-dimensional “external” space—meaning these are the four dimensions in Einstein’s relativity theory—and a 6- or 7-dimensional “internal” space—meaning these dimensions relate to psychic and other “intangible” phenomena.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI)inventionjournals
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI) is an international journal intended for professionals and researchers in all fields of Humanities and Social Science. IJHSSI publishes research articles and reviews within the whole field Humanities and Social Science, new teaching methods, assessment, validation and the impact of new technologies and it will continue to provide information on the latest trends and developments in this ever-expanding subject. The publications of papers are selected through double peer reviewed to ensure originality, relevance, and readability. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online
In this podcast, Bob Keebler covers Revenue Procedure 2014-18, which provides a simplified method for certain taxpayers to obtain an extension of time to make a portability election. Rev. Proc. 2014-18 provides an automatic extension for certain estates of decedents dying in 2011, 2012 and 2013 to elect portability. The extension applies to estates that would otherwise not have had a filing requirement, and allows the estates to file a return to elect portability until December 31. It includes the estates of same-sex decedents who were not eligible to elect portability until after the Windsor decision. Access more resources in the Planning After ATRA and NIIT Toolkit, including more podcasts, new charts by Bob Keebler as well as webcast recordings and Forefield Advisor alerts/videos, and the complete four-volume set of The CPA’s Guide to Financial & Estate Planning, recently updated for ATRA and NIIT, and much more.
Abstract According to Rene Descartes, Cartesian Dualism implies .docxransayo
Abstract
According to Rene Descartes, Cartesian Dualism implies that human beings exist in two different forms. One being in form of matter, which refers to the physical being that can walk, talk and play; and the mind which is the non-physical being which is referred to as the spirit or soul; that is able to think, recall and doubt. He also proposes that matter performs its duty according to its own laws until the mind interferes, meaning the mind pulls the lever that allows the body to function daily. I agree and defend Descartes’ proposition; the human anatomy has a control center which is the brain and within the brain is the mind that perceives and conceives. The brain is the center where information is processed then turn into motion and action. Without our brain our body would not move. Patients in comas are in a still state and cannot move their body or function.
This thesis statement won’t work, for three reasons. First, the prompt is quite clear that you can’t just agree with an author. You have to give your own argument. If you want to defend them, you have to defend them against a specific objection. Second, the claim that “the mind is in the brain” isn’t obviously Cartesian. On Descartes’s view, the mind isn’t “in” anything. Third, and probably most importantly, the argument should be about something reasonable people can disagree on. But claims like “the brain processes information” or “brains are essential to movement” are indisputable platitudes; it’s like arguing that the sky is blue.
Separate point: the essay is likely to be more successful if you address not just Descartes’s conclusion, but also one of his arguments for it.
Thesis Statement: 12/30
Preview of Argument: 25/45
Stage-setting: 10/15
Grammar: 9/10
56%
- 30% late penalty
= 26%
Surname 2
John Ubom
Surovell
Phil 4370
Cartesian Dualism
Introduction
As stated by Descartes (1), dualism is a term used to refer to the existence of two fundamental categories of kinds of things in a given domain. Dualism is the direct opposite of monism which denotes the occurrence of a single category or kind of principle or thing. Pluralism on the other hand refers to the existence of many categories or kinds. Cartesian dualism is a concept advanced by Rene Descartes proposing that the mind or soul is totally different from the body. Rene
regarded the mind as the non-extended thinking thing while the body was the extended non-thinking thing. The argument gave rise to the famous mind body-body dualism problem eliciting reaction from scholars such as Lowe, Elizabeth, Princess of Bohemia, and Richardson. This study therefore summarizes the argument as well as the objections to it.
Cartesian Dualism, according to Descartes, implies that human beings exist in two different forms
. He believed that one exists in the form of matter referring to the physical being that is able to walk, talk and play. Then, Rene states that there is another form known as the mind, which is the non-physic.
Mind-body interaction has a central place in our .pdfarpowersarps
Mind-body interaction has a central place in our pretheoretic conception of
agency... Indeed, mental causation often figures explicitly in formulations of the mind-body
problem.... Some philosophers... insist that the very notion of psychological explanation turns on
the intelligibility of mental causation. If your mind and its states, such as your beliefs and
desires, were causally isolated from your bodily behavior, then what goes on in your mind could
not explain what you do... If psychological explanation goes, so do the closely related notions of
agency and moral responsibility... Clearly, a good deal rides on a satisfactory solution to the
problem of mental causation [and] there is more than one way in which puzzles about the mind\'s
“causal relevance” to behavior (and to the physical world more generally) can arise. [René
Descartes] set the agenda for subsequent discussions of the mind-body relation. According to
Descartes, minds and bodies are distinct kinds of substance. Bodies, he held, are spatially
extended substances, incapable of feeling or thought; minds, in contrast, are unextended,
thinking, feeling substances... If minds and bodies are radically different kinds of substance,
however, it is not easy to see how they could causally interact... Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia
puts it forcefully to him in a 1643 letter... how the human soul can determine the movement of
the animal spirits in the body so as to perform voluntary acts—being as it is merely a conscious
substance. For the determination of movement seems always to come about from the moving
body\'s being propelled—to depend on the kind of impulse it gets from what sets it in motion, or
again, on the nature and shape of this latter thing\'s surface. Now the first two conditions involve
contact, and the third involves that the impelling thing has extension; but you utterly exclude
extension from your notion of soul, and contact seems to me incompatible with a thing\'s being
immaterial... Elizabeth is expressing the prevailing mechanistic view as to how causation of
bodies works... Causal relations countenanced by contemporary physics can take several forms,
not all of which are of the push-pull variety
Solution
Mind-body interaction has a central place in our pretheoretic conception of
agency... Indeed, mental causation often figures explicitly in formulations of the mind-body
problem.... Some philosophers... insist that the very notion of psychological explanation turns on
the intelligibility of mental causation. If your mind and its states, such as your beliefs and
desires, were causally isolated from your bodily behavior, then what goes on in your mind could
not explain what you do... If psychological explanation goes, so do the closely related notions of
agency and moral responsibility... Clearly, a good deal rides on a satisfactory solution to the
problem of mental causation [and] there is more than one way in which puzzles about the mind\'s
“causal relevance” to beha.
Chapter 7. The Mind-Body ProblemChapter 7. The Mind-Body Pro.docxspoonerneddy
Chapter 7. The Mind-Body Problem
Chapter 7. The Mind-Body Problem
Chapter 7
The Mind-Body Problem
During week 6 read the second half (Sections 6-end).
Copyright by Paul Herrick, 2020. For class use only. Not for distribution. This chapter: 32 pages of reading.
1. Are You Your Brain?
Sometimes we refer to our brains; other times we refer to our minds. BJ the Chicago Kid titled his second album In My Mind. But Screeching Weasel titled its third studio album My Brain Hurts. Are the mind and the brain two different things? Or are they one and the same? To put the question another way: Are thoughts, sensations, mental images, and such nothing more than physical events or processes of the physical brain? Are they just neurons (brain cells) firing or something like that? Or is the mind an immaterial, nonphysical entity distinct from the brain but interacting in some way with it? In philosophy, these and related questions make up the mind-body problem.
Since ancient times, the common view has been that the mind—the part of us that is conscious, that thinks, that makes choices, that bears moral responsibility—is immaterial and cannot be physically seen, touched, weighed, or otherwise directly detected by instruments. On this view, the mind--often called the “soul,” “spirit,” or “self”—is not the brain or any part of the body or any physical thing at all. However, since mind and body obviously interact, the common view has long been that the mind or soul can affect the body and the body can affect the mind. More specifically, the immaterial mind can cause changes in the physical body, through the interface of the physical brain, and the brain can cause changes in the mind.
In philosophy, this traditional view is called “mind-body dualism” (“dualism” for short) because it claims that mind and body are two distinct things. The common view is sometimes also called “mind-body interactionism” because it claims that mind and body, though distinct, interact. Philosophical dualists argue that the universe divides into two radically different kinds of substances—mindless matter and thinking mind or, as some prefer to put it, matter and spirit, or as still others put it, matter and consciousness.
Most religions of the world teach a dualist account of human nature. Each human being, they generally claim, is composed of an immaterial mind or soul joined to a material body. On the religious view, the mind, or soul, rather than the material body is the part that will be judged by God in the end. As the basis of moral responsibility, the soul is the root of one’s identity as a person. In other words, the soul is the true self; the material body is merely the soul’s temporary lodging place during its journey on earth. Most religions also teach a doctrine of immortality, or survival—the claim that the immaterial soul lives on in a higher realm after the death and disintegration of the material body.
If dualism is true and your immaterial mind, or soul, is the .
Chapter 7. The Mind-Body ProblemChapter 7. The Mind-Body Pro.docxrobertad6
Chapter 7. The Mind-Body Problem
Chapter 7. The Mind-Body Problem
Chapter 7
The Mind-Body Problem
During week 6 read the second half (Sections 6-end).
Copyright by Paul Herrick, 2020. For class use only. Not for distribution. This chapter: 32 pages of reading.
1. Are You Your Brain?
Sometimes we refer to our brains; other times we refer to our minds. BJ the Chicago Kid titled his second album In My Mind. But Screeching Weasel titled its third studio album My Brain Hurts. Are the mind and the brain two different things? Or are they one and the same? To put the question another way: Are thoughts, sensations, mental images, and such nothing more than physical events or processes of the physical brain? Are they just neurons (brain cells) firing or something like that? Or is the mind an immaterial, nonphysical entity distinct from the brain but interacting in some way with it? In philosophy, these and related questions make up the mind-body problem.
Since ancient times, the common view has been that the mind—the part of us that is conscious, that thinks, that makes choices, that bears moral responsibility—is immaterial and cannot be physically seen, touched, weighed, or otherwise directly detected by instruments. On this view, the mind--often called the “soul,” “spirit,” or “self”—is not the brain or any part of the body or any physical thing at all. However, since mind and body obviously interact, the common view has long been that the mind or soul can affect the body and the body can affect the mind. More specifically, the immaterial mind can cause changes in the physical body, through the interface of the physical brain, and the brain can cause changes in the mind.
In philosophy, this traditional view is called “mind-body dualism” (“dualism” for short) because it claims that mind and body are two distinct things. The common view is sometimes also called “mind-body interactionism” because it claims that mind and body, though distinct, interact. Philosophical dualists argue that the universe divides into two radically different kinds of substances—mindless matter and thinking mind or, as some prefer to put it, matter and spirit, or as still others put it, matter and consciousness.
Most religions of the world teach a dualist account of human nature. Each human being, they generally claim, is composed of an immaterial mind or soul joined to a material body. On the religious view, the mind, or soul, rather than the material body is the part that will be judged by God in the end. As the basis of moral responsibility, the soul is the root of one’s identity as a person. In other words, the soul is the true self; the material body is merely the soul’s temporary lodging place during its journey on earth. Most religions also teach a doctrine of immortality, or survival—the claim that the immaterial soul lives on in a higher realm after the death and disintegration of the material body.
If dualism is true and your immaterial mind, or soul, is the .
CHAPTER 4The Nature of Substance, Reality, and Mind Idealism,.docxchristinemaritza
CHAPTER 4
The Nature of Substance, Reality, and Mind: Idealism, Dualism, and Materialism
There are a number of complex philosophical issues brought about by a discussion of substance. As you may recall from an earlier chapter, the Ancient Greeks were very much concerned about the question of substance. At present, science tells us everything is made up of material atoms, and yet, philosophers still debate this scientific conclusion. It is not to say that atoms do not exist (although no one has actually seen one, which is another question about scientific realism), but rather a question of what is reality made up of, mind, matter, or a combination of both.
These questions lead to other questions regarding the nature of the human mind. Is it just the brain or does it have an immaterial component? What of the soul? All these questions will be considered in the following sections below.
POWERFUL IDEAS: THE NATURE OF SUBSTANCE
Materialism claims that all real objects are physical. Dualism claims that all real objects are either physical or nonphysical. Idealism claims that all real objects are nonphysical.
Berkeley and Idealism
Berkeley contends that the only things that are real are ideas. This view is known as idealism. All the objects we encounter in the world (which is an idea as well) are nonmaterial objects. As bizarre as this may at first sound, what you should be aware of is the fact that the only objects that we do have direct access to in our mind (or brain) are ideas.
We assume that our idea of objects in the world is tied to or come from these objects; some underlying physical substance, yet Berkeley is denying that we have any good reason to infer to this material substance. Berkeley employs a radical empiricism. He thought that we can only acquire knowledge from our experiences—from our per- ceptions. What is the nature of our perceptions? We assume that we perceive objects directly, yet in fact, what we are doing is experience an idea of the object, which has been constructed by our mind. Berkeley goes on to argue that “to exist is to be perceived.”
Berkeley contends that the only things that are real are ideas. All the objects we encounter in the world—which is an idea as well—are nonmaterial objects. As bizarre as this may at first sound, what you should be aware of is the fact that the only objects that we do have direct access to are our ideas. We assume that our idea of objects in the world are tied to or come from those objects (we think those ideas correspond to object in reality), some underlying physical substance, yet Berkeley is denying that we have any good reason to infer to is this material substance.
He may have a point. Consider a strawberry, for example. It has a certain color, shape, and weight; it has a particular texture, taste, and smell. These are all perceptions, ideas in your mind. If you take away the taste of the strawberry, take away its smell, its weight, its shape—what do you have left? Nothing. The ...
2 Divided Minds and the Nature of Persons Derek Parf.docxfelicidaddinwoodie
2
Divided Minds and the Nature of
Persons
Derek Parfit
Derek Parfit, who was born in 1942, has been a philosopher at All Souls
Coilege, Oxjord for many years. He has also taught frequently in the United
States. The main subjeas on which he has worked have been rationality,
morality, personal identity, and juture generations. These are the subjeas of
his book Reasons and Persons, publis hed by Oxford University Press in
1984.
It was the split-brain cases which drew me into philosophy. Our
knowledge of these cases depends on the rcsults of various psychological
tests, as described by Donald MacKay.! These tests made use of two
facts. We control each of our arms, and see what is in each half of our
visual fields, with only one of Ollr hemispheres. When someone's
hemispheres have been disconnected, psychologists can thus present to
this person two different written questions in the two halves of his visual
field, and can receive two different answers written by this person's two
hands.
Here is a simplified imaginary version of the kind of evidence that such
tests provide. One of these people looks fixedly at the centre of a wide
screen, whose left half is red and right half is blue. On each half in a
darker shade arc the words, 'How many colours can you see?' With both
hands the person writes, 'Only one'. The words are now changed to read,
'Which is the only colour that you can see?' With one of his hands the
person writes 'Red', with the other he writes 'Blue'.
If this is how such a person responds, I would conclude that he is
having two visual sensations - that he does, as he claims, see both red and
blue. But in seeing each colour he is not aware of seeing the other. He has
two streams of consciousness, in each of which he can see only one
colour. In one stream he sees red, and at the same time, in his other
stream, he sees blue. More generally, he could be having at the same time
two series of thoughts and sensations, in having each of which he is
unaware of having the other.
This conclusion has been questioned. It has been claimed by some that
there are not two streams of consciousness, on the ground that the sub-
dominant hemisphere is a part of the brain whose functioning involves no
The Daibutsu (Great Buddha) at Kamakura, Japan, construded in 1252, Derek Parfit s denial of
the concept of a person is remarkably similar to a central tenet of Buddhist philosophy (photograph by
Colin Blakemore),
20 Persons
consciousness. If this were true, these cases would lose most of their
interest. I believe that it is not true, chiefly because, if a person's
dominant hemisphere is destroyed, this person is able to react in the way
in which, in the split-brain cases, the sub-dominant hemisphere reacts,
and we do not believe that such a person is just an automaton, without
consciousness. The sub-dominant hemisphere is, of course, much less
developed in certain ways, typically having the linguistic ...
A sharp surge of interest in spiritualism was caused by the First World War. “The tragedy of my family only increased the desire to share my observations and conclusions with others,” wrote Sir Oliver Lodge, author of the sensational book “Raymond” (which told about his communication with his dead son). “Now I will do it, relying on the sad experience of my own experiences, and not resorting to the experience of others.”
Death, touching almost every family with its cold breath, suddenly aroused interest in the issues of life after death. People not only wondered: “If a person dies, can he come to life again?”, But they also passionately desired to establish a connection with the souls of loved ones and loved ones who had so tragically left the earthly world. They longed for "the touch of their native hand and the sound of a painfully familiar voice." Thousands of people took up research, but, as in the early period of the development of the movement, the first discoveries were often made by those who had already left this world. Newspapers and the press could not resist the pressure of public opinion: stories about the return of dead soldiers and, deeper, the problem of life after death received wide coverage in the press.
For most of the twentieth century a “brain-first” approach dominated the philosophy of consciousness. The idea was that the brain is the thing we really understand, through neuroscience, and the task of the philosopher is try to understand how that thing “gives rise” to subjective experience: to the inner world of colours, smells and sounds that each of us knows in our own case. This philosophical project has not gone all that well–nobody has provided even the beginnings of a satisfying solution to what David Chalmers called “the hard problem” of consciousness.
1. Harrod 1
Mariah Harrod
Professor A. Roche
Philosophy 210
April 20, 2015
Spinoza’s Mind-Body Monism and its Connection to Materialism
Our perception of self as both an external body and an internal stream of consciousness—
a series of present moments and their subsequent descent into the past—led Descartes to assert
that the body and mind compose two distinct substances. In the process of accepting Descartes’
theory of mind-body dualism, later philosophers Leibniz and Malebranche also inherit the
obligation to explain whether and how two distinct substances interact. Whether their individual
expositions succeed is a matter we will not discuss too extensively, for their hypothetical
successes remain rooted in the misconception that consciousness cannot arise from physical
interactions of the body. Of the early modern philosophers, Baruch Spinoza alone theorizes that
the physical brain and psychical conscious mind exist as one. Body-mind monism corresponds
best with empiricism, a school of thought built on the notion that
by refraining from abstracting the human consciousness into a metaphysical ideal, thus evading
the problem of interaction faced by the dualists. In this paper, I will explain Descartes’ proposal
of dualism and the interaction issue to demonstrate how Spinoza’s mind-body monism
automatically side-steps the entailing controversies of interaction responses and proceed to
demonstrate how Spinoza triumphs in this debate due to his comparative concurrence with the
empirically-supported theory of materialism.
2. Harrod 2
René Descartes proposed the substantive split between the body and mind later coined
“dualism.” Descartes defines a body as “all that is capable of being bound by some shape, of
being enclosed in a place, and of filling up a space in such a way as to exclude any other body
from it” (“Meditations on First Philosophy” 44). Yet for Descartes, human ideas and sensations
cannot be attributed to the mechanistic workings of this body, of which the sole mode is
extension. This assertion is founded in his view that the nature of the body does not comprise
“the power of self-motion” (44). Rather, the body is a passive receptor of the active mind. To
further this claim, Descartes establishes that a stream of consciousness—prior used in the first
meditation to demonstrate a thinking thing’s existence—is all that cannot be separated from
identity. “Thought exists; it alone cannot be separated from me” (44). Accordingly as long as a
thing thinks, it exists. Descartes’ argument for dualism is therefore hinged on the foundational
cogito ergo sum which states that we are first and foremost only assured the existence of our
mental state and not of our body. Fundamentally what exists is the mind, which Descartes
believes is eternal, indivisible, and distinct of the finite body. While the mind can exist
independently, as Descartes perceives through meditation, the body does not necessarily exist.
Perhaps the most influential contention with mind-body dualism is presented by Princess
Elisabeth. She desires an enumeration of the method of the interaction of two separate substances
having distinct natures, for the mode of the body is extension yet the mode of the mind is
thought—purely psychical. How could either one influence the other if one is intangible and the
other physical? Elisabeth writes, “It seems that how a thing moves depends solely on (i) how
much it is pushed, (ii) the manner in which it is pushed, or (iii) the surface-texture and shape of
the thing that pushes it” ("From Correspondence between Descartes and Princess Elisabeth” 8).
Descartes seemingly misunderstands her inquiry to be one of epistemological conceptions of
3. Harrod 3
mind and body rather than their metaphysical interaction. Later dualists Leibniz and
Malebranche contribute their own responses in the forms of pre-established harmony and
occasionalism, respectively. It is often assumed that Descartes fails to properly answer the
interaction dilemma; while Leibniz and Malebranche merit respect in their own theories (Leibniz
contending that the two do not actually interact but whose movements are synchronized by God,
Malebranche stating that God alone causes the motions of the body), they still face controversy.
Non-materialists like these dualists posit the existence of a something which cannot by definition
be empirically proven because of its lack of physical existence. Monism alone assuredly solves
both the mind-body interaction problem and coincides most fully with the contemporary
demonstrations that empirical scientific method (rather than the abstraction of a non-physical
mind) can observably explain mental states.
Spinoza’s monism contends that modes of the body are identical to modes of the mind.
This Identity Theory argues that, rather than two distinct attribute categories of modes and their
coordinating substances, there exists only one. To elaborate, “Thinking substance and extended
substance are one and the same substance, comprehended now under this attribute, now under
that. So, too, a mode of Extension and the idea of that mode are one and the same thing,
expressed in two ways” (Spinoza 166). Essentially, the single substance that exists—in Spinoza’s
view, God—contains all possible attributes. Each attribute can only be conceived through itself;
though our perception may isolate a characteristic of a thing, it cannot be said that two
conceptually distinct attributes constitute two existentially distinct entities (147). Due to the
consolidation of mind and body as identical modes of a single substance with infinitely many
attributes, Spinoza entirely avoids the interaction problem faced by the dualists. A substance
which is numerically one and the same cannot be said to interact with itself. This monism to a
4. Harrod 4
large extent coincides with materialist theories in the agreement that all phenomena within our
world are caused exclusively by physical interaction.
Materialism attempts to ground the claims made throughout the history of philosophy
positing the existence of spiritual phenomena. It confronts the escapism tactic of explaining away
the unknown and ambiguous with an ideal, be it an ideal of perfect, immutable Forms or an
infinitely powerful and benevolent deity. Rather, it asserts that all phenomena are material and as
such are explicable in terms of particles. Such a theory has received growing support in the form
of empirical research as society acknowledges the ability for matter in motion to behave in
predictable, observable patterns. Humans often attribute things they could not explain without
proper technology to the metaphysical, a tendency which has effectively indoctrinated society to
believe in a special realm which diametrically opposes our own physical one. However, as
scientific collaboration and the collection of buildable knowledge has increased, such
phenomenon—such as weather, death, and consciousness—previously explained by referencing
infinite beings and spirit have been studied in terms of matter. To apply materialism to the mind-
body question, consciousness is dualistically attributed to the human’s unique spiritual mind
bequeathed to us by a loving, anthropomorphic God to model His image. This explanation of an
epiphenomenon receives support because we perceive both internal and external happenings that
are perceived as separate. However, consciousness has been studied as a product of physical
reactions which occur in the brain and has been proven experimentally to be affected by
alterations of the body—a feat which contradicts dualist accounts.
Contemporary psychology provides experimental evidence that perception is a product of
neurons firing and releasing chemical signals to other neurons, all of which are composed of
fundamentally similar particles of matter (which according to Einstein’s special relativity is an
5. Harrod 5
interchangeable state of energy. Monism looks better by the second). Demonstrating the
physicality of the generally conceived metaphysical phenomenon of consciousness, a study
performed at George Washington University manipulated an individual’s consciousness by
applying electrical impulses to the brain (Aldorf). The individual lost and regained consciousness
in accordance with the electrical signaling. Yet Descartes, Leibniz, and Malebranche would have
us believe that consciousness is not a product of the bodily functions but of something entirely
independent and accordingly unaffected. This is but one demonstration; an experiment at
Vanderbilt University attempted to discern whether consciousness is caused by the activation of
neurons within a certain section of the brain or by the simultaneous connection between multiple
active regions. By recruiting participants to engage in fMRI scanning, researchers found that
conscious awareness of a phenomenon—a disk flashing on a computer monitor—increased the
connectivity and total metabolic activity within the brain (Moran). Furthermore, psychology
teaches that the processes of our mind—such as decision-making, sensing, and memory
storage—can be attributed to sections within the brain as exemplified when loss of a physical
piece deprives an individual of that localized mental ability. These studies demonstrate how
mental states such as conscious awareness are merely the result of bodily functions.
Materialism garners more support as technology advances, but is Spinoza a materialist?
The short answer is no, but in comparison to Descartes, Leibniz, and Malebranche his theoretical
consolidation of mind and body coordinate most faithfully with this contemporary thought.
Spinoza does argue that the mind is simply the brain undergoing physical reactions; however, he
does not support the materialist notion that the physical is more fundamental than the psychical.
His proposition that every corporeal thing carries a coordinating idea such that the two are
inextricably bound and equally ontologically ubiquitous founds his theory that all things have
6. Harrod 6
psychical minds (Spinoza 169). Spinoza favors this panpsychism and thus attributes minds even
to inanimate entities, contrary to the materialist notion that thought arises from a unique,
distinctive series of physical occurrences. Yet Spinoza should still be respected for pioneering
the divergence from the anthropocentric notion that humans have an inimitable, spiritual “mind”
elevating our kind above purely mechanistic beasts. His mind-body monism unifies what we
perceive subjectively to be opposites in a manner reminiscent of Parmenides, but it does not
conclude that entities are fundamentally physical as they comprise equal psychical components.
Some may find materialism edifying; others may dislike its refrain from postulating when
physical mechanisms are unobservable. My argument in support of Spinoza’s mind-body theory
rather than modern dualist theory depends upon the validity of materialist philosophy.
Accordingly, we confront qualia—the properties of sensory experience. The problem posed by
qualia lies with the assertion that all mental states are physical. But through conscious experience
we seemingly gain sensory knowledge inaccessible through knowledge of its physical causes.
For example, knowing the biochemical mechanisms of an individual’s perception of the color red
without actually knowing what it is like to perceive red. The latter seems inexplicable, for it
seems that there are mental states which the materialist cannot produce with explanation of
physical mechanisms. David Lewis suggests that this experience acquisition does not grant the
individual new, physically-inexplicable knowledge but rather a purely physical ability to
perceive red (Tye). Though the individual may understand the physical mechanisms of the
perception of red, certain physical mechanisms in the form of an ability of that mental state are
absent prior to the experience. We can use this Ability Hypothesis to validate materialism, and
with the acceptance that Spinoza’s theory corresponds best with this philosophy we conclude
that he comes closest to the truth of the nature of the human mind and body, numerically one.
7. Harrod 7
Works Cited
Aldorf, Justine. "Researchers May Have Discovered The Consciousness On/Off Switch."
IFLScience. N.p., 03 July 2014. Web. 01 Apr. 2015.
Descartes, René. "Meditations on First Philosophy." Modern Philosophy: An Anthology of
Primary Sources. Ed. Roger Ariew and Eric Watkins. 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub.,
1998. 35-68. Print.
Descartes, René and Elisabeth of Bohemia. "From Correspondence between Descartes and
Princess Elisabeth." Trans. Jonathan Bennett. Early Modern Texts. July 5, 2013. Web.
October 2009. <http://www.earlymoderntexts.com>. Rpt. in 17th and 18th Century
Philosophy, PHI 220. Ed. Andrew Roche. 2015: 8-12. Print.
Moran, Melanie. "Network Theory Sheds New Light on Origins of Consciousness." Vanderbilt
Research. National Institutes of Health, 9 Mar. 2015. Web. 01 Apr. 2015.
Spinoza, Baruch. "The Ethics." Modern Philosophy: An Anthology of Primary Sources. Ed.
Roger Ariew and Eric Watkins. 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub., 1998. 144-170. Print.
Tye, Michael. "Qualia." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University, 20 Aug.
1997. Web. 01 Apr. 2015.
Why empiricism is best
o Only thing we can know (Hume)