The Mind Body Problem : Phineas Gage

In his writings, “A Contemporary Defense of Dualism,” J.P. Moreland argues the point that the mind and brain are separate from each other. It seems as a quick thought that both are the same. However, the mind deals with ideas, thoughts and hopes. The brain is made up of the neural process. Throughout the entire argument, Moreland tries to prove the theory of physicalism, which is the idea that only things that exist are composed of matter. His explanation is that the soul doesn’t exist and the brain controls everything.

In this paper, I will examine the principal merits and challenges of René Descartes’ concept of dualism and then defend my preferred alternative among the options Paul M. Churchland discusses. After briefly defining Cartesian Dualism, I will show that its principal merits are that it is consistent with common sense and that it is able to explain phenomena that appear mental in nature. Next, I will show that its principal challenges are its failure to adequately explain how the mind and the body can causally interact, and its failure to respond to the observation that brain damage impairs the mind. Finally, I will explain why Functionalism is the best alternative to Cartesian Dualism.

In a series of relatively simple though complexly-worded (out of necessity) thought experiments regarding body-swapping and changes to memory and the mind, Bernard Williams attempts to demonstrate that identity should be identified with the body rather than with the mind when identity is extended into the future (and by extension during the present). That is, though it is typical for identity to be associated with the mind at any given moment, Williams argues that the logic that supports this intuitive association does not hold up over longer periods of time, and that anticipation of the future leads to an association of identity with the body rather than with the mind. Whether or not Williams is successful in this attempt is a matter of much debate, with this author finding some fundamental flaws in the very premise of the comparisons and thus the conclusions, however the argument is fairly elegant and persuasive and certainly worth of closer inspection. A careful reading of the argument might lead one to a conclusion opposite to that which was intended, but is no less rewarding for this unusual quirk.

The mind is a complex myriad of thoughts and psychological systems that even philosophers today cannot entirely grapple. It is composed of the senses, feelings, perceptions, and a whole series of other components. However, the mind is often believed to be similar or even the same as the brain. This gives rise to the mind-brain identity theory, and whether there exists a clear distinction between the physical world and the non-material mind. In this paper, I will delineate the similarities and differences between mind and brain, describe the relevant ideas such as functionalism and materialism, and provide explanations on how these theories crystallized. Further, I will discuss the differing views of this concept from multiple philosophers’ perspectives and highlight the significance of each. Ultimately, I will defend the view that the mind-brain identity theory is false by analyzing its errors and examining the invalid assumptions it makes about consciousness.

When contemplating the relationship between the mind and body, most philosophers advocate either dualism, the view that the mind and body belong to the mental and physical categories respectively, or physicalism, the stance that there is only the physical. (Gertler 108) Brie Gertler upholds the former perspective, and her essay In Defense of Mind-Body Dualism aims to disprove physicalism by establishing the possibility of experiencing pain without the firing of C-fibers, which physicalists believe is identical to pain. (110) She claims that thought experiments are best for determining matters of possibility, but only if such experiments utilize “sufficiently comprehensive” concepts. After first clarifying why Gertler emphasizes the need for

These three Body-Mind views present possible ways to examine the accident that Phineas Gage suffered an entire change in personality from. Physicalism presents the best argument for explaining the Gage case. If everything is physical it is certainly logical for the personality and thought processes of a human to change after enduring an entirely physical injury. Physicalism suggests that everything about human beings can be explained just by looking at the pure physical processes of the body and specifically the brain, so clearly it presents a sound argument for why Gage endured such a drastic change in who he actually was. Gage according to dualism may have had the same mind, but according the physicalism certainly did not have the same brain and therefore, to quote his coworkers, “was no longer

One of the most talked about concepts of philosophy is that of the mind-body problem. In short, the mind-body problem is the relationship between the mind and the body. Specifically, it’s the connection between our mental realm of thoughts, including beliefs, ideas, sensations, emotions, and our physical realm, the actual matter of which we are made up of the atoms, neurons. The problem comes when we put the emphasis on mind and body. Are the mind and body one physical thing, or two separate entities. Two arguments have stood amongst the rest, Interactionism and physicalism. Interactionism claims that mind and matter are two separate categories with a casual integration between the two. By contrast, physicalism draws from the idea that all aspects of the human body are under one physical being, there are no nonphysical connections that come into play. While both state a clear and arguable statement regarding mind-body problem, Interactionism gives a more plausible answer to the mind-body problem because although it may seem like we are tied as one, our minds have a subconscious that influence our thoughts, actions, ideas, and beliefs, which is completely independent from the realm of our physical matter.

Armstrong begins his paper with a question for the reader of what it means to have a mind. It is well understood that man has the ability to perceive, to think, to feel, and so on, but what does it mean to perceive, to think, and to feel? The answer, he believes, lies in science. Seeing that science is constantly and rapidly gaining ground, he asserts that “...we can give a complete account of man in purely physico-chemical terms” (295?) Pointing out the fact that this view has been accepted by various scientists throughout time, he explains it is the most reliable way to approach the mind-body problem.

In denying that the mind and mental properties, like qualia, are nonphysical things, mind-brain theory objects to both substance and property dualism. Therefore it is a physicalist approach to the philosophy of

Today, Gage’s story is a fixture for any student of psychology or neurology. After his death in 1860, Gage’s skull and the iron rod were donated to the Warren Anatomical Museum of Harvard University where they remain on display today. So, on a warm Boston summer day, I made my way to the museum to see the skull and rod for

Phineas Gage was the man who lived. That is to say he survived a metal rod being blasted quite literally through his frontal lobe. The tragic accident that befell Phineas Gage was in some ways his involuntary gift to mankind. His misfortune or perhaps his incredible luck has paved the way to understanding the brain, its functions, and what happens where. While i have no doubts that should this accident have happened in today's world that he would have lived and recovered almost fully, his involuntary sacrifice jump started biological psychologists understanding of the brain, and for this i thank him.

Lucretius expands on this first truth by observing that while the soul cannot have any effect without a body, the effects of physical blows suffered by the body are shared in by the soul. “You perceive the mind to suffer along with the body, and to share our feeling in the body. If the grim force of a weapon driven deep to the dividing of bones and sinews fails to hit life, yet a languor follows and a blissful fall to the ground... and sometimes a kind of hesitating desire to rise” (161). The direct effects of physical injury felt by the body on the mind, he writes, are proof that “the nature of the mind must be bodily, since it suffers by bodily weapons and blows” (161). In fact, Lucretius’ example of a mind weakened by blood loss is only the beginning of the many forms of havoc physical trauma can wreak upon the mind. Relatively recent examples include the case study of Phineas Gage, whose life survived the destruction of a portion of his brain in an accident, but whose personality assuredly did not. According to reports from the company that had employed him, Gage, once the possessor of “temperate habits” and “considerable energy of character,” was transformed by his injury into an individual described as “‘Fitful,’ ‘irreverent,’ [and] grossly profane” (Macmillan 829). In less extreme cases, cognitive functioning and personality are altered temporarily on a daily basis by the consumption of alcohol and drugs or with psychiatric

Physicalism is the idea that the physical facts are all of the facts; which implies that if you know all of the physical facts you know all facts. Physicalism is a type of substance monism and there are several different kinds of physicalism, but it is not necessary to go into the specifics because Jackson targets the validity of physicalism as a theory of the mind and not a specific type of physicalism.

A physicalist is one who believes that all information is physical. This is a view that sees all factual knowledge as that which can be formulated as a statement about physical objects and activities. Thus, the language of science can be reduced to third

The mind-body problem is an age-old topic in philosophy that questions the relationship between the mental aspect of life, such as the field of beliefs, pains, and emotions, and the physical side of life which deals with matter, atoms, and neurons. There are four concepts that each argue their respective sides. For example, Physicalism is the belief that humans only have a physical brain along with other physical structures, whereas Idealism argues that everything is mind-based. Furthermore, Materialism argues that the whole universe is purely physical. However, the strongest case that answers the commonly asked questions such as “Does the mind exist?” and “Is the mind your brain?” is Dualism.