Descartes was a great proponent of interactionist dualism. “In the philosophy of mind, dualism is the theory that the mental and the physical[,] or mind and body[,] are […] radically different” in nature. In addition, “interactionism is the view that mind and body […] causally influence each other.” In this essay, I will argue that Descartes’ view on interactionist dualism is incorrect. I will do so by: 1) presenting Descartes’ argument for dualism; 2) objecting to his arguments; 3) considering possible refutations to my objections; and 4) assessing the implications of interactionist dualism.
Descartes’ argument for dualism is comprised of three premises. He asserts in the first premise that anything that can be “clearly and distinctly” understood …show more content…
For example, a brain-dead person cannot keep themselves alive, and must rely on medical assistance. It is evident from both the perspectives of the mind and the body therefore, that the two exist in a symbiotic relationship. While one can, in abstract theory, exist without the other, such conditions are realistically unattainable.
Perhaps it can be argued that while the mind and body cooperate in many instances, it does not suggest that they rely on each other for existence. The example of the brain-dead patient may be imperfect, as one cannot prove that the lack of brain activity is equivalent to the absence of consciousness. Should consciousness persist despite an inactive brain, then the idea of dualism might not be so farfetched. Nevertheless, it is difficult to draw the line between partnership and …show more content…
According to Descartes’ view, the body and the mind can exist independently from each other, especially since “each possesses completely different properties from the other[,]” with the body being a material object and the mind being immaterial. A problem arises however, when the body and the mind are defined as being completely different in attributes. Namely, how does one exert influence over the other when they share no common connector? Descartes credits the pineal gland for the contacts between mind and body, which has been proven false. The larger problem however, is not the location of the interaction, but rather how it can occur in the first place. Followers of Cartesian dualism have often cited the “direct intervention of God” as an explanation, but as mentioned before, such a method of rationalization is insufficient.
In conclusion, Descartes’ belief that mind and body are able to exist without the other cannot be proven, on account of his disputable arguments for it. Furthermore, interactionism seems to be incompatible with Cartesian dualism. Therefore, without practical evidence of how interactionist dualism could operate, it is difficult to accept this theory as
Descartes’ argument for dualism is comprised of three premises. He asserts in the first premise that anything that can be “clearly and distinctly” understood …show more content…
For example, a brain-dead person cannot keep themselves alive, and must rely on medical assistance. It is evident from both the perspectives of the mind and the body therefore, that the two exist in a symbiotic relationship. While one can, in abstract theory, exist without the other, such conditions are realistically unattainable.
Perhaps it can be argued that while the mind and body cooperate in many instances, it does not suggest that they rely on each other for existence. The example of the brain-dead patient may be imperfect, as one cannot prove that the lack of brain activity is equivalent to the absence of consciousness. Should consciousness persist despite an inactive brain, then the idea of dualism might not be so farfetched. Nevertheless, it is difficult to draw the line between partnership and …show more content…
According to Descartes’ view, the body and the mind can exist independently from each other, especially since “each possesses completely different properties from the other[,]” with the body being a material object and the mind being immaterial. A problem arises however, when the body and the mind are defined as being completely different in attributes. Namely, how does one exert influence over the other when they share no common connector? Descartes credits the pineal gland for the contacts between mind and body, which has been proven false. The larger problem however, is not the location of the interaction, but rather how it can occur in the first place. Followers of Cartesian dualism have often cited the “direct intervention of God” as an explanation, but as mentioned before, such a method of rationalization is insufficient.
In conclusion, Descartes’ belief that mind and body are able to exist without the other cannot be proven, on account of his disputable arguments for it. Furthermore, interactionism seems to be incompatible with Cartesian dualism. Therefore, without practical evidence of how interactionist dualism could operate, it is difficult to accept this theory as