Descartes Divisibility Argument Essay

Moreover, Descartes relies on having a thorough knowledge of mind and body. We may conclude with Descartes that thought is necessary to having a mind, and materiality is necessary to having a body, it does not inevitably follow that there is an entity whose sole nature is to think. Descartes is limited by his subjective viewpoint that it could not be the case that extension could be another property of mind. He needs to prove the stronger argument that it is not possible for the mind to have extension as one of it’s properties. Descartes tries to make this proof in his Divisibility Argument:

René Descartes believed that the mind and body are separate; that the senses could not always be trusted, but that because we as humans are able to think about our existence, we possess some sort of entity separate than our fleshly body. I believe this separate entity to be a soul”an immaterial and

Descartes concludes from his first meditation that he is a thinking thing, and as long as he thinks, he exists. In the second meditation, Descartes attempts to define what the “thinking thing” that he concluded himself to be in the first meditation actually was. Descartes’ determines that he gains knowledge of the world, that is, knowledge that is separate from the mind, through the senses; and that the senses can deceive. This he outlines within the first meditation, and mentions on the second meditation. Furthermore, in the second meditation, Descartes refuses to define himself as a rational animal, instead going back and relying on labeling him mind as a thinking thing. In the fifth and sixth paragraphs of the second meditation, Descartes distinguishes the body from the soul. Descartes indicates that there is the presence of the body, and it seems to be in the physical world, but he also notes that his mind does not seem to exist in the same manner. Descartes also claims that the ability to perceive is a power of the soul, but inoperable without the body. Descartes then explores another object with physical substance, which is a piece of wax. The piece of wax is undeniably physical; it takes up space within the material world. The body falls into the category, just as any other physical object in the material world. The main point of Descartes’ second meditation is that any given person can know more about their mind than of the world surrounding them.

By the first premise Descartes refers to an activity that the body does not participate in. For instance, perception and walking are two activities which either directly requires the body (walking) or relies upon the body (perception). The activity of thinking can be done without a body. You can clearly and distinctly imagine yourself without a body, but you cannot imagine not thinking. Premise 2 indicates this distinction even more. Since the activity of thinking is separate from the body then this activity does not fall into doubt. Anything the body senses or is part of the body can be doubted because the mind’s eye would only perceive the image the body creates which has previously be shown to be dubious. A possible objection is that Descartes is pointing to another representation which the body has created. For instance, the body has created the image of thinking which the mind’s eye views. In addition, could we not be dreaming and thus deceived that we are thinking or could there be a demon deceiving

The essence of a thing is the property or set of properties that the thing cannot do without. Decartes claims the essence of body is extension and the essence of mind is thought, therefore the two are completely distinct. The manner in which he comes to this conclusion is through his following argument: Descartes claims to understand the mind to be indivisible by its very nature. He also understand body to be divisible by its very nature. He therefore concludes, the mind is completely different from the body. (59). Descartes come to this conclusion that mind and body are distinct, not by stating that there is a clear and distinct understanding of the nature’s of mind and body as completely different, but rather bases his argument on a particular property of each substance. He does not prove this by choosing any property but a rather a property that the mind and body has by its very own nature. “There is a great difference between the mind and the body, inasmuch as the body is by its very nature always divisible, while the mind is utterly indivisible” (59). Descartes is using the term “nature” synonymously with “essence.” He claims that extension constitutes the essence of bodily kinds of things, while thinking constitutes essence of mental things. In other words, a property of what it is to be a body, or extended thing, is to be divisible, while a property of what it is to be a mind or thinking thing is indivisible. He ultimately proves

Reneì Descartes’ treatise on dualism, his Meditations on First Philosophy, is a seminal work in Western intellectual history, outlining his theory of the mind and its relation to the rest of the world. The main argument running through the Meditations leads from his universal methodic doubt through his famous cogito, to proofs of dualism, God, and the world. The Cartesian dualism is one of the most influential ideas to come out of the work; the style of the Meditations, however, is one of personal rumination, following what appears to be Descartes’ stream of consciousness , and it allows for mild tangential discussions. Hence alongside his more famous argument for dualism,

that you exist is proof that you in fact exist as how can you doubt

In Meditation six: Concerning the Existence of Material Things, and the Real Distinction between Mind and Body, Rene Descartes wrote of his distinctions between the mind and the body, first by reviewing all things that he believed to be true, then assessing the causes and later calling them into doubt, and then finally by considering what he must now believe. By analyzing Descartes’ writing, this paper will explicate Descartes’ view on bodies and animals, and if animals have minds. Before explicating the answer to those questions, Descartes’ distinctions between the mind and the body should first be summarized and explained.

Descartes dualism proposal is an interesting concept due to its simplicity. Yet, being so simply makes one more and more want to dismiss. His argument begins with what is known as Real Distinction. This is the term used to describe a substance or non-physical object that exists on due to the help of a higher being or power—be it God or science, though Descartes would likely argue for God. The mind, in Descartes view, can only exist because of this higher power. One knows the mind exists simply due to being able to ask the question of its existence. However, to prove that the body exists one must think about the physical nature, shape, and sensations of said body. In Descartes sixth meditation he discusses the idea that a person can conceive their mind without their body, but cannot conceive of the reverse. This argument seems to be the most sounds.

René Descartes’ seventeenth century philosophy receives much of the credit for the basis of modern philosophy, specifically his argument that the body and the mind are completely separate substances, each with its own independence from the other, also known as dualism. Descartes was educated in the Aristotelian and Greek tradition, and those ideas influenced his dualist thought. In Meditations, Descartes focused on dualism in the context of human consciousness. While the work is organized in separate ‘Meditations’, and Descartes’ main motivation for writing it was likely philosophical exploration, there are mentions of God in the part of Meditations on dualism, because the separation of mind and body often leads to the necessity of the existence of a soul, and therefore gave itself nicely to a seventeenth-century theology. Despite its organic religious affiliation, Meditations was not universally agreed upon, or even well liked, specifically by people who believed that the body and the mind, everything that makes up a person, is the same physical substance. Among these disbelievers in Cartesian dualism was Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia, a staunch materialist who responded to Descartes’ work through a series of letters. Elisabeth’s doubts of Descartes’ dualism remain one of the greatest arguments against substance dualism.

Descartes’ Meditation 6 explains the distinction between the mind and body. He explains that he is confused as to why his mind is attached to a particular body to which he calls his own. He questions why pain or tickling happens in his own body but does not occur in any body outside of his own and why a tugging feeling in his stomach tells him that he is hungry and that he should eat. From this, he perceives that he is only a thinking thing. The idea of a body is merely extended and the mind is

The concept of mind and body interactions has been debated among many modern philosophers. Some believe that our minds and bodies are different things, thus existing separately, while others believe that they exist as a whole. In this paper, I will be introducing two rationalist philosophical views regarding this topic, one which is by Rene Descartes and the other by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Rationalists, in philosophical terms, are the ones who obtain their knowledge through reasoning rather than the human senses. Descartes and Leibniz both have similar perspectives, but Leibniz takes a slightly different approach to improve Descartes’ argument. This paper will first show Descartes’ original argument, an example that proves the argument to be invalid, and then lastly, a revised version of the argument with Leibniz’s help.

Descartes was a Renaissance philosopher who affirmed the value of the deductive method (Chaplin & Krawiec, 1983). This is an essential part of the scientific method where in the search for knowledge one passes from the general to the particular in a way that starting from premises of universal character particular statements are inferred. His philosophical method of questioning all propositions leads him to suggest that doubt is an act of thinking and he could not doubt that he thought, affirming the primacy of existence: I think, therefore I am. This leads him to mind and body dualism and to consider that although they are separate entities they act among themselves, for what is called interactionist (Chaplin & Krawiec, 1983). The

Finally, Descartes’ third dispute for the distinction of mind and body, ‘The Divisibility Argument’, lies in Meditation VI. He reveals his thoughts by saying: “I perceive that there is a big difference between the mind and the body insofar as the body, by its, nature, is always divisible whereas the mind is evidently indivisible” (Descartes, 2003: 67). He explicitly states that it is easy for him to imagine the body, a material substance, being split into parts. However he cannot imagine the mind, an immaterial substance, as having parts. Further on, Descartes heavily relies on Leibniz’s Law to construct the argument. Leibniz’s Law, also known as ‘Indiscernibility of Identicals’ proclaims that there cannot exist two identical substances with differing properties. Descartes’ argument can be simply

     In this paper, I will examine the issues of individuation and identity in Descartes’ philosophy of mind-body dualism. I will begin by addressing the framework of Cartesian dualism. Then I will examine the problems of individuation and identity as they relate to Descartes. Hopefully, after explaining Descartes’ reasoning and subsequently offering my response, I can show with some degree of confidence that the issues of individuation and identity offer a challenge to the Cartesians’ premise of mind-body dualism.