Compare And Contrast Plato's Theory Of Substance Dualism

Amazing Essays
Dualism has been the centre theory for the philosophy of mind since the adaptation of Plato’s original ideas about the world and the metaphysical world. However, with the fast paced development of modern age Science and further post enlightenment philosophy. There have been a number of challenges to Descartes’ position; such as the ontological reduction of the mind to the brain proposed by Mind-Brain Identity Theory. Descartes’ is known for his enlightenment, rationalist philosophy. Perhaps his most significant theory is his modern adaptation of Plato’s doctrine of antitheses. Plato supposed that the body belongs to the physical universe made of imperfect changing material, whereas the mind/soul exists in a metaphysical realm made of perfect ideas.
Similarly, Descartes claims that there two kinds of substances: the physical matter (E.g. the body) and the metaphysical (E.g. mind/soul). He then concluded that because these substances are separate, they must have distinct essential properties to one and other. The body can be seen as physical, within space time, doubtable and the body decays. In contrast, the soul can is considered metaphysical, a non-temporal substance, not within space time and incapable of decaying. This led to the
…show more content…
Cartesian Dualism is unable to account for how the mind is divisible should it be an immaterial substance. Whereas the mind being divisible gives very strong evidence to Mind-Brain Identity theory, as it seems to indicate that physical processes on the brain affect the mind pointing to the mind being physical and at least, within or apart of the mind. Despite this, one could not take the research far enough to state that the mind is the same as the brain, but at least is ontologically reducible to the

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Avicenna in his major work Kitab Al-Najat argues that the human soul is not material. He argues that the rational faculty, namely the soul, does not know through physical organ. In this sense, he can prove that the soul is not inhered in the material body, therefore indicating that the soul is immaterial. Avicenna argued in Kitab Al-Najat that “for there is no organ between the rational faculty and itself, nor does one intervene between it and its organ or between it and the fact that it knows”. (Avicenna, 51) As in his previous argument and experience, the rational faculty has direct access to the knowledge of itself without any intermediary.…

    • 725 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    First, there are also some similarities between Zeno and the Platonists and Peripatetics. Platonists admit that being is a body, and the corporeality of the soul. Moreover, Peripatetics acknowledge that soul is the principle of life in the organic body, and is inseparable from the body. Plus, Peripatetics attack on Plato and rejected the abstractness of the form, which could be also means that the form is incorporeal. This shows that in some part, the Peripatetics admit the corporeality of the form.…

    • 886 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Since a mental state is ‘reducible’ to a physical state, mental causation turns out to be physical to physical causation for the reductive materialist. This solution does not seem to be available to the British emergentist of late nineteenth and early twentieth century, as he accepts independent causal efficacy of the mental. One proposal may be that mental causation amounts to the mental initiating a causal process. In reductive physicalism, it is the physical that initiates the causal process. However, this proposal appears to be unworkable, as the causal chain does not seem to have a beginning.…

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Plato's Argument Analysis

    • 1667 Words
    • 7 Pages

    To be unchanging and objective it therefore must reside outside of, or separate from, the physical existence in a transcendent state. In this way, Plato distinguishes between the physical world of sense experience and that of rational knowledge. What Plato was seeking was the purest idea of something or its…

    • 1667 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Theories Of Dualism

    • 1826 Words
    • 8 Pages

    However, other emergentists, such as Thomas Henry Huxley, refused this idea and argued that even though the physical events in the brain trigger mental events, mental events do not have the ability or capacity to impact any kind of physical events, including behaviors (1874). This form of emergentism is called epiphenomenalism. More interestingly, Baruch Spinoza proposed a related dualist theory, which is known as double aspectism. According to Spinoza, the mind and body are similar to two sides of the same coin that they are different but inseparable from each other. He believed that physical events happening to the material body can be experienced as emotions and thoughts, and mental events also impact the material body.…

    • 1826 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The phenomena like memory, learning capabilities and dreams are all relevant to processes of brain but dualism fails to provide a justified explanation to any of that. It is the logic developed through scientific facts and common sense that negates the idea of Descartes’s dualism even if it can’t be disapproved…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In order to understand the positions held by each thinker, we must first decipher what the terms, soul and immortality mean to both Plato and Hume respectively. For Plato, the soul is an unextended, incomposite and immaterial substance which functions as a bridge between the metaphysical world of forms and the material world we live in. He finds the soul to be definitionally distinct from the body, because it is the immaterial aspect of a human being, whereas the body is the material aspect. Hume, on the other hand, opposes this dualism and argues that the soul and body are the same thing. The term immortality is used the same way by both philosophers to depict, an eternal continuity of consciousness after physical death.…

    • 1519 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Then there is the mind which is the substance of thought and occupies no space. They way Descartes describes “thought” as a substance is because he believes that a substance “requires nothing other than itself to exist” (page 100). However, there were contradictions and problems with Descartes’ metaphysical dualism. One of these contradictions was that Descartes believed that material things “are completely subject to physical laws” (page 100). However, he also believed that our mind can move our body.…

    • 796 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    From Plato’s perspective, trapped in his body, one’s soul was deceived by the world that he directly perceived, and only through the pure exercise of reason or philosophical thinking could one authentically reach the very truth of the world-the world of form where everything is objective, perfect, eternal and independent. The sensible world is just an imperfect replica of the world of form constructed by the divine craftsman (the Demiurge). Therefore, in Plato’s theory, the measurement of reality seems to be the extent to which something is similar to the world of form, which means that the closer a thing is to the world of form, the more real the thing is. Nevertheless, such a measurement is not convincing enough to me and thus raise my further thinking. The world of form, a perfect and eternal world is actually predicted by Plato rather than proved by him.…

    • 920 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    His transcendental idealism makes it impossible for the human mind to acquire knowledge about things-in-themselves, because spatial objects are mere appearances which are synthesized according to the conceptual framework provided by the categories. As such these are mere phenomena while things-in-themselves belong to the noumenal realm beyond the capacity for the human mind to comprehend or process. On the Cartesian view, however, experience of objects in space are necessarily mediated because this mediate experiential knowledge is an inner relation. As established, our being immediately conscious of something is for Descartes solely in an inner sense and hence radically separates the knowing mind from objects (as things-in-themselves) existing in space. As such, the inner relation of consciousness cannot reach knowledge of spatial objects on its own; what is needed is an inferential argument which can help ground a way for the empirical idealist to gain this knowledge.…

    • 1494 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays