Descartes is trying to prove the existence of God, and the reason he is doing so he can further try to prove the existence of everything else. He did so by going through a series of meditations. In his fifth meditation Descartes said that the mind and the body are two distinct substances. His main premise was Cogito Ergo Sum which means I think therefore I am. With Cogito Ergo Sum he is certain of his existence. He differentiates understanding a concept and imagination, then goes onto say that without imagination it would not affect a person 's ability to understand something because understanding occurs within the mind itself whereas the imagination occurs when images are put into the brain. Afterwards he made a statement that the mind and
…show more content…
Descartes says that if a foot or a hand were to be cut off then the body would only be affected and the mind would not. He quotes that "Since it is the same mind that wills, that senses and that understands" this means that cannot be considered as dividing the mind into three parts because it is the same mind that does all of those. He then goes onto say that he can easily think of ways to divide the body whereas the mind would give him much difficulty think of a way to divide the mind. Which is another reason as to why the mind and the body are different from each other although it may appear that they are connected as one, they only have a close relationship with each other but are different. Descartes main premise was that if you are a thinking thing than evidently you are thing period. Essentially the mind is a thinking thing therefore it is, whereas the body does not possess the ability to think therefore it helps him conclude that the mind and the body are two very distinct substances. In his second meditation he quotes "I am not that framework of limbs that is called a body" (p.20) "For I have supposed that these things do not exist". He denies the existence of his body but using cogito ergo sum he thinks therefore he is a "true thing" shows that in his earlier meditations the mind and the body are different substances. This argument has more of a better …show more content…
In my personal opinion Descartes second argument proving that the mind and the body is different was a lot more convincing than his first argument because he provided more of an explanation for his reasoning rather than just using the reason that having a clear and distinct understanding of something thus making it exist. I would not consider his arguments to be successful because for his first argument is too weak in my opinion. And for his second argument he defends it well by saying the body cannot cause pain to the mind whereas only the brain can affect the mind. Defending this he used an example with string and if one end of the string was pulled than the other end would follow making relation to the body that if the pain in the foot the pain goes through the nerves and follows to the brain. And he proves this by concluding that if a part of the body was in pain the nerves sends the signal to the brain and a part of the brain classifies this as pain and affects the mind in that way, but it is not the body that does the affecting. In conclusion his second argument was more successful than his first
Descartes says that if a foot or a hand were to be cut off then the body would only be affected and the mind would not. He quotes that "Since it is the same mind that wills, that senses and that understands" this means that cannot be considered as dividing the mind into three parts because it is the same mind that does all of those. He then goes onto say that he can easily think of ways to divide the body whereas the mind would give him much difficulty think of a way to divide the mind. Which is another reason as to why the mind and the body are different from each other although it may appear that they are connected as one, they only have a close relationship with each other but are different. Descartes main premise was that if you are a thinking thing than evidently you are thing period. Essentially the mind is a thinking thing therefore it is, whereas the body does not possess the ability to think therefore it helps him conclude that the mind and the body are two very distinct substances. In his second meditation he quotes "I am not that framework of limbs that is called a body" (p.20) "For I have supposed that these things do not exist". He denies the existence of his body but using cogito ergo sum he thinks therefore he is a "true thing" shows that in his earlier meditations the mind and the body are different substances. This argument has more of a better …show more content…
In my personal opinion Descartes second argument proving that the mind and the body is different was a lot more convincing than his first argument because he provided more of an explanation for his reasoning rather than just using the reason that having a clear and distinct understanding of something thus making it exist. I would not consider his arguments to be successful because for his first argument is too weak in my opinion. And for his second argument he defends it well by saying the body cannot cause pain to the mind whereas only the brain can affect the mind. Defending this he used an example with string and if one end of the string was pulled than the other end would follow making relation to the body that if the pain in the foot the pain goes through the nerves and follows to the brain. And he proves this by concluding that if a part of the body was in pain the nerves sends the signal to the brain and a part of the brain classifies this as pain and affects the mind in that way, but it is not the body that does the affecting. In conclusion his second argument was more successful than his first