Is Descartes' Dualism Convincing?

Does Descartes provide a convincing argument for the claim that mind and matter are distinct substances? Or does he not?

Discuss.

Reply 1

RawJoh1

Should one do one's own homework? Should others on the internet help them, when they haven't even bothered with the momentary effort to phrase the question is a non-obvious "this-is-what-I've-been-set-this-week" way?

Discuss.

Reply 2

Jedicake

Descartes doesn't really provide an argument for the idea that these are two different "stuffs". They interact so readily with each other (e.g. the mind says go to the cinema, and your body instantly takes you there) that it seems odd that they can be seperated.

Reply 3

RawJoh1

Original post by Jedicake

Descartes doesn't really provide an argument for the idea that these are two different "stuffs".

This is not true. Descartes does provide at least one argument that the mind and the body are distinct.

For example:

"And, firstly, because I know that all which I clearly and distinctly conceive can be produced by God exactly as I conceive it, it is sufficient that I am able clearly and distinctly to conceive one thing apart from another, in order to be certain that the one is different from the other, seeing they may at least be made to exist separately, by the omnipotence of God; and it matters not by what power this separation is made, in order to be compelled to judge them different; and, therefore, merely because I know with certitude that I exist, and because, in the meantime, I do not observe that aught necessarily belongs to my nature or essence beyond my being a thinking thing, I rightly conclude that my essence consists only in my being a thinking thing [or a substance whose whole essence or nature is merely thinking]. And although I may, or rather, as I will shortly say, although I certainly do possess a body with which I am very closely conjoined; nevertheless, because, on the one hand, I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in as far as I am only a thinking and unextended thing, and as, on the other hand, I possess a distinct idea of body, in as far as it is only an extended and unthinking thing, it is certain that I, [that is, my mind, by which I am what I am], is entirely and truly distinct from my body, and may exist without it."

Is that a good argument? Well, I'm not convinced by it. But it's an argument nevertheless.

Reply 4

Kibalchich

Original post by Kiss

Does Descartes provide a convincing argument for the claim that mind and matter are distinct substances? Or does he not?

Discuss.

Utterly unconvincing. Antonio Damasio does a good job of demolishing it in from a neurobiological pov in Descartes Error.

Reply 5

snozzle

My tentative view is that the 'I', the self, arises from social interaction. We internalise the others we interact with, and this 'me' views the 'I' as both object and subject, and we have an internal dialogue. I suppose this is a phenomenological pov to some extent and i am just forming a view here. Neurobiology will never find 'the mind' in the brain since it in part exists in a kind of metaphysical social space and is too a historical process.

Reply 6

Kibalchich

Its certainly true that to have a theory of mind, we have to have "good enough" interactions with our caregivers.

Reply 7

snozzle

Original post by Kibalchich

Utterly unconvincing. Antonio Damasio does a good job of demolishing it in from a neurobiological pov in Descartes Error.

Unfortunately consciousness precedes empirical investigation.

There's a lot in our language which implies a dualism. For example one might say "I know my own mind". How does an object grasp itself? Only a object with substance dualism can grasp itself by intention over the 'metaphysical gap'.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Articles for you

What is an LLM and how could it benefit your career?

What is student accommodation like at uni?

How easy is it to switch courses once I’m at university?

Is a postgrad course worth it? The pros and cons of postgraduate study