|
|
|
Revision:Body and Soul
From The Student RoomTSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > A Level Religious Studies Revision Notes > Body and Soul
DualismThe idea that the mind and body are two separate substances; it is possible to survive death, as the soul disembodies. Human beings consist of both physical bodies and non physical minds and that the mind is the essence of a person.
PlatoPlato was a dualist. He believed that the soul and the body are two separate substances that interact. The real identity of the person lies with the soul. The Body and the mind are often in opposition. The body is interested in sense pleasures, such as eating and sleeping, which often get in the way of intellectual pursuits. Often the demands of the body take over completely. Plato saw the body as a nuisance and a bind. It is not the real person. We may say I have a body but not I am a body. Plato believed that the real person is separate and distinct from the body it inhabits. The soul has existed prior to being in the present body and, on death, will leave the body. The soul is on a higher level of reality than the body, being immortal with understanding of the realm of ideas. The body is concerned with the senses, the soul with reason. The soul is not always perfect however, the body corrupts it and drags it down Humans have the task of taking care of the soul but is easily corrupted.
Plato’s four arguments for the existence of a soulPlato’s four arguments for the existence of a soul are as follows: • The Linguistic Argument: the fact that we use language about ourselves which suggests a distinction. I, we, me refers to an inner, separate reality. • The Knowledge Argument: Somehow within the world of flux and change we can grasp these universals which are not affected by time and space; so there must be something within us that is equally unaffected by flux and change that has the ability to grasp them. • The Argument from Recollection: Because we know the universals we must have seen them before. • Cycle of Opposites: We know things by their opposites. Death must come from life and life from death. This suggests a perpetual recycling of human souls from the realm of the living to the realm of the dead and back.
Strengths• Stephen Evans: “…Plato offers a rational argument for the existence of another reality, which can be read off this world, even though not fully; this involves free choice.” • Magee: “The theory that there is another world than this…gives value and meaning to our present world...”
CriticismsBrian Davis’ Challenge: • Not everything has an opposite • The Linguistic Argument only shows that I am a thing distinct from my body • He challenges Plato’s conception of the self as an un extended thing that does not pass out of existence, because it cannot be split or broken ( Simple) , on the grounds that it is a very weak argument.
• Identity comes from body/physical characteristics too and without our bodies we could not be identified • Things we do to the body affect our mind e.g. drugs and mind appears to be dependent on the brain • If mind is not linked to body we would not make things happen in the world (mind linked to physical activity)
Substance dualismIn this type of dualism it is the mind that takes priority and influences the body. Ultimately in this form of dualism it is the mind, the non material, which carries personal identity.
Rene DescartesArgues that the body is extended (in time and space and subject to decay) and The mind is unextended. He identified the ‘mind’ as the root of all the feeling and sensations that he experienced but could not locate physically. In theory we can doubt the existence of everything including the body but cannot doubt that I am thinking“I think therefore I am” – Cogito ergo Sum He saw the mind/body as existing in two different realms- the mental and the physical. The mind is non-spatial, and conscious. It experiences thought, feelings, desires and emotions. This is private and non-observable. The body is located in time and space. It is material. It is not conscious. It is publicly observable.
Criticisms• Brian Davis argues that his “argument is invalid. Fred can doubt that he is a professor of philosophy, but Fred cannot doubt on that he exists, therefore Fred is not a professor of philosophy.” • Modern science has shown links between the mind and the brain so how can the mind survive on its own? • The minds are non physical objects, how can the mind cause anything to happen in the physical world? For example, I think of running for the bus; but if my mind is not linked to my body, then why does the physical act of running for the bus take place?
MonismMonism is the metaphysical and theological view that all is one. Human beings are made up of one substance (not two, as in dualism) and that what it is to be human can be defined in material terms.
Gilbert Rye (Critique of Dualism/Supporter Of Monism)Gilbert Ryle formulates a materialist, psychological challenge to dualism, but to Cartesian dualism in particular. In "The Concept of Mind" (1949), he argued that the idea of the soul, which he described as "The ghost in the machine" was “A category mistake". He argued that it was a mistake in incorrect use of language. It resulted to people speaking of the mind and body as different phenomena as if the soul was something identifiably extra within a person. He used the example of someone watching a cricket game and asking where the team spirit was. In this way, Ryle argued that talk of the soul was talk about the way a person acted and integrated with others in the world. It was not separate and distinct. To describe someone as clever or happy did not require the existence of a separate thing called mind or soul. The mind or spirit does not exist hence the phrase there is no ghost in the machine
MaterialismMaterialism is the view that only that which we can come to knowledge of empirically (i.e. through the senses) is real and do not accept the existence of a separate soul as it cannot be verified. It is based on and understanding of the universe that has one substance only, that being material, and generally a belief that the universe is governed by cause and effect.
Richard DawkinsHe is a materialist who believed that Human beings are bytes of digital information. There is no soul or consciousness as we are the sum total of our genes. He concentrates of the idea that humans are merely carriers of information and DNA.
While Dawkins does not deal with the concept of the soul he looks instead at the idea of consciousness. Dawkins addresses this feeling of individuality within each human by arguing that this is because our genes are working together. We cannot perceive ourselves as a colony but as a whole. This working together of our genes is based on the desire for survival of those genes. The development of consciousness: • If an act has bad results the animal will not repeat it • If an act has good results the animal will repeat it • Ultimately the colony of genes needs a central control in order for it to function so the colony develops the brain • Animals evolve so behaviour is no longer trial and error but they develop the capacity to predict the results of certain action. This enables them to choose how to behave. Dawkins claims that now that the consciousness has evolved, the genes’ need for replication is no longer the driving force behind contemporary evolution. There is a new replicator, a meme. The meme can be seen as a parasitic structure lodged in the brain
Criticisms• People can hide their feelings and can mimic the behaviour of another emotion • Are these not a conscious decision of the person? More than just an chemical response? Or environmental stimuli? • Dawkins' theory about evolution and the selfish gene, however, does not explain things like emotions. According to his theory, emotions would be a mistake since they are usually inefficient, and often only get in the way of genetic progress.
Soft MaterialistThey believe that people are wholes, not divided as in dualism, but do not believe that all a person is, is a sum total of genes. Unlike Dawkins (a harsh materialist) soft materialists believe in life after death.
John HickHick’s view of personal identity, is that a person is more than the mental processes. A Person includes both the physical and the mental and the Human is therefore a psycho physical unity. What lives after death is a replica or a duplicate. The replica comes to life in heaven as an exact copy of the person who lived and died on earth. God creates this replica to live on after death. The important thing to remember about John Hick’s ‘Replica’ theory is the distinction he makes between logical possibility and factual possibility. He himself claims that his theory is not factually possible, but suggests that changes in the way matter functions could make it factually possible. Hick sets up three scenarios through which he attempts to demonstrate that resurrection of the person is a logically possible hypothesis. 1. A man is at a conference in London, and during the blinking of his eyes, he finds himself transported to a conference in New York. He has continuity of body, memory and personality (he’s the same person) which is verified by friends of his from London who travel to New York to see him. 2. Instead of a sudden disappearance, there is a sudden death. The man at the conference in London dies and an exactly similar ‘replica’ of him appears in New York. There is continuity of memory, body and personality and a living counterpart of a dead man in another country. 3. A person dies and is ‘replicated’ in another world which is populated with other dead persons who have been ‘replicated.’ It is God who brings this resurrection/’replication’ about. Number 3 is Hick’s ‘replica’ theory. He suggests that it is logically possible for there to exist a separate world populated by resurrected persons (‘replicas’) who are brought back to life by God. He uses these three examples to show that logically (not factually) this can happen, but that being resurrected is quite different to merely being transported from say, London to New York.
Strengths• If you accept God’s omnipotent existence, this theory is plausible. Hick claims it is far more biblical. This theory is totally reliant on the acceptance of God. • He does not posit a soul and so does not have to verify one • Hick’s theory challenges the conflicting claims argument because by it everyone goes to heaven: Buddhists as well as theists • The theory does not depend upon dualism and is possibly acceptable to materialists. • The theory is possible in terms of logic.
Criticisms• To some philosophers there is just too much suffering. As we saw in our criticisms of Irenaeus, the end can never be worth the suffering of one innocent child. In Hick’s theodicy evil is a necessary thing, willed by God, as it the only way to achieve the aim of developing human souls. • Vardy challenges Hick. Would John Smith be the same person? Hick argues that he would if he thought of himself and others thought of himself as the same person, but is this enough? It is a replica the same person? • Perhaps the biggest critique of the is that he doesn't successfully get over the continuity problem. Vardy thinks that there is a break in continuity so much so that the replicated could not be the same person. • Bernard Williams argues that Hick’s portrayal of an endless life of replications would be a meaningless life. It might prove a boring life. • Hick’s basic argument is that this theory is logically coherent and there is no evidence to the contrary. However, this is a weak form of argument. Just because something could happen, doesn’t mean that it actually happens. • Logical possibility does not equate to factual possibility.
IdealismIs a monist theory which holds that the most important element in the nature of reality is mind or spirit. Classic idealism tends towards the theory that there is no such entity as a physical world, all matter, in the sense of an independently existing object. They also posit that all mental events and processes are brain events. Bishop Berkley held this view.
CommentsThis is specifcally revision notes for Body and soul as part of the Philosophy module in the OCR Religious Studies exam. To see the introduction/ problems with personal identity click here Note however this can be used for other purposes as well. This was created by Chrisateen | 
|
