How successful are Descartes' arguments for the real distinction of mind from body? Upon which would you put the most weight?
How successful are Descartes' arguments for the real distinction of mind from body? Upon which would you put the most weight?
Descartes argues has three main arguments for minds and bodies being two different distinct types of substance. These are known as arguments for substance dualism and are as follows.
* The Argument from doubt : Descartes argues that while he could pretend or think that he had no body and therefore did not exist in any place, he could not think or pretend he had no mind, as merely having a doubt that he had a mind proves that he does.
* The Argument from Clear and distinct understanding: Descartes argues that if two things can be separated even if only by god then they must be two different things. Descartes says that as he can perceive minds and bodies clearly and distinctly from each other they must be two separate things we just don't know how to separate them.
* The Argument from simplicity: Descartes argues that bodies can be divided into parts whereas minds cannot meaning that the two must be different things.
For our minds to be separate from our bodies first of all we have to exist otherwise there is nothing about which to argue and no stand point to argue from. Also we must be able to believe that things of which we think in this case minds and bodies exist and that if we perceive something as correct it must be true. So it is important to all of Descartes's arguments to establish not only that we exist but also that we can be certain of what we claim to know. The cogito is Descartes's claim "that I thinking therefore I exist" Descartes says that as he can convince himself of something he must exist, as even if he is being deceived by some supernatural power as long as he is still thinking that he is something then he is. Further more the mere doubt that you exist is proof that you in fact exist as how can you doubt something unless you are existing. "I assuredly existed, since I was persuaded. But there is I know not what being, who is possessed at once of the highest power and the deepest cunning, who is constantly employing all his ingenuity in deceiving me. Doubtless, then, I exist, since I am deceived; and, let him deceive me as he may, he can never bring it about that I am nothing, so long as I shall be conscious that I am something. So that it must, in fine, be maintained, all things being maturely and carefully considered, that this proposition (pronunciatum ) I am, I exist, is necessarily true" (Descartes Meditations, II, p16,17). Descartes's also says that clear perception, clarity and distinctness are present in the cogito, he says that these qualities are essential in being sure of anything. Clearly perceiving something might mean that you think you are sure of it but you could be wrong, Clarity and distinctness of perception means that you recognise the reasons for the claim made by clear perception for what you believe to be true being true, Descartes called this the mark of knowledge. Together the cogito and the mark of knowledge set a firm foundation for all of Descartes's conclusions by showing that he and all of us exist and that we can be certain about things we are perceiving Therefore the cogito and mark of knowledge must be taken into account in all of Descartes's arguments.
Descartes argues has three main arguments for minds and bodies being two different distinct types of substance. These are known as arguments for substance dualism and are as follows.
* The Argument from doubt : Descartes argues that while he could pretend or think that he had no body and therefore did not exist in any place, he could not think or pretend he had no mind, as merely having a doubt that he had a mind proves that he does.
* The Argument from Clear and distinct understanding: Descartes argues that if two things can be separated even if only by god then they must be two different things. Descartes says that as he can perceive minds and bodies clearly and distinctly from each other they must be two separate things we just don't know how to separate them.
* The Argument from simplicity: Descartes argues that bodies can be divided into parts whereas minds cannot meaning that the two must be different things.
For our minds to be separate from our bodies first of all we have to exist otherwise there is nothing about which to argue and no stand point to argue from. Also we must be able to believe that things of which we think in this case minds and bodies exist and that if we perceive something as correct it must be true. So it is important to all of Descartes's arguments to establish not only that we exist but also that we can be certain of what we claim to know. The cogito is Descartes's claim "that I thinking therefore I exist" Descartes says that as he can convince himself of something he must exist, as even if he is being deceived by some supernatural power as long as he is still thinking that he is something then he is. Further more the mere doubt that you exist is proof that you in fact exist as how can you doubt something unless you are existing. "I assuredly existed, since I was persuaded. But there is I know not what being, who is possessed at once of the highest power and the deepest cunning, who is constantly employing all his ingenuity in deceiving me. Doubtless, then, I exist, since I am deceived; and, let him deceive me as he may, he can never bring it about that I am nothing, so long as I shall be conscious that I am something. So that it must, in fine, be maintained, all things being maturely and carefully considered, that this proposition (pronunciatum ) I am, I exist, is necessarily true" (Descartes Meditations, II, p16,17). Descartes's also says that clear perception, clarity and distinctness are present in the cogito, he says that these qualities are essential in being sure of anything. Clearly perceiving something might mean that you think you are sure of it but you could be wrong, Clarity and distinctness of perception means that you recognise the reasons for the claim made by clear perception for what you believe to be true being true, Descartes called this the mark of knowledge. Together the cogito and the mark of knowledge set a firm foundation for all of Descartes's conclusions by showing that he and all of us exist and that we can be certain about things we are perceiving Therefore the cogito and mark of knowledge must be taken into account in all of Descartes's arguments.
