A Critique of Descartes’ Mind-Body Dualism, Essay Example

Cartesian reason concerning the trans-physical nature of the soul, which is essentially inspired by Descartes, presents the argument for the soul in the assumption that there is a separation between mind and body that underlies the essential nature of the world itself.  Due to the idea that material existence will decay over time while incorporeal material lasts forever, this idea presents the soul as something that must be a fundamental aspect of existence.  This is based in the assumption that there is, in fact, a dual nature of reality that is split between mind and body in humans.

The Cartesian argument for the existence of the soul states, first of all, that thought itself is a personal, or private, aspect of a person’s reality.  While this is true of the mental realm, there can be no physical reality that is completely personal in this same way.  Thus, if there are is no material aspect to thought then, at the very least, humanity possesses at least this one non-material aspect to their existence.  The other question that is prompted concerns the idea of how two things that are very different, such as the mind and body, have an effect on each other.  Furthermore, the soul is a non-physical, immaterial, notion.“Thus because we have no conception of the body as thinking in any way, we have reason to believe that every kind of thought which exists in us belongs to the soul” (Gentile 8)  The ideas of thought and the soul are connected in some fundamental way.  If this is true, then the soul must exist, as this immaterial aspect of people’s existence would not decay in the way that material bodies do.  Therefore, humans do, in fact, have souls.

Descartes refers to the mind and body as separate substances.  In regard to substances, Descartes refers a substance as an existing thing that needs nothing else in order to exist. In addition, he refers to the physical properties of the substance, such as shape, movement, mass, and volume, as modes of extension in which each person has a mental substance and each person is attached to a body for which they can interact.  (Brown)Descartes also discusses the topic of immortality and the soul being independent of each other as well.  “When we know how much the beasts differ from us, we understand much better the arguments which prove that our soil is of nature entirely independent of the body, and consequently that is not bound to die with it.”(Hickson)  This point further strengthens the idea of the soul as an independent entity.

Descartes also did not support reasoning and the existence of a soul in non-human animals and living things.  He rationalizes this through using the mechanical approach in regard to animals and concentrating on the animals as a mechanical body in o order to decrease the guilt of humans for killing and eating animals. This type of rationalization allowed for the knowledge that animals did not undergo suffering or emotional responses. This idea supports the Cartesian dualism theory that is correlated with the lack of mind in animals. Through the research of mechanisms to animal movement after the removal of the brain, such as observed in frog experiments, and the lack of language and reasoning in animals, it was thought that animals do in fact lack minds.  Therefore, in regard to the Cartesian viewpoint of human consciousness and a soul, the mechanistic processes didn’t explain the capacity for the ability of humans to be rational, speak, and be self-aware.  This viewpoint further explained the phenomenon of the human soul.  (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Throughout a large part of philosophical history, thinkers have posited a dual understanding of the soul.  They argue that it is fundamentally separate from the physical body.  By basing their arguments on this dichotomy, philosophers have been able to establish that the aspects of mind and body are essentially separate.  This leads to the conclusion that human beings have a being that is separate from the physical world.  This is the basis for the argument that the soul is non-physical and, therefore, eternal.

It is not clear, in a universal sense, what a soul can actually be described as being.  Within the preeminent ideas of culture, it seems to represent a person’s actual identity, their thoughts, history, hopes, and understandings of the world.  In this sense, there is not a big difference between a person’s soul and their identity. “Descartes can be read as offering one kind of solution. On his view, the mind just is ‘the whole of the soul that thinks’; in other words, the relationship between mind and soul is one of identity.” (Pasnau 4)  The issue with this line of thought lies in its inability to account for the physical aspects of existence that work to create these essential functions of the human mind in order to create the sense of self that people often identify with.

The biggest issues that go along with the arguments put forth by Descartes involving the dual nature of existence, and therefore the existence of the soul, is that his philosophy is enamored in the medieval philosophical notions of being.  While he was able to use his reasoning abilities to overcome many philosophical and logical issues, he was able to entirely transcend a philosophy that wasn’t completely dependent upon the existence of God. “At this juncture, Descartes is only sure of the following: that he has mind; that whatever proposition he perceives clearly and distinctly to be true, must be true; that God exists; and that God cannot deceive him.” (Mohammed 99)  Here, it is evident that Descartes’ arguments are inherently dependent upon the notion that God, due his pure and true nature, would not allow mankind to be deceived.  In addition, Descartes’ philosophy does not rationalize why all other animal bodies are not suitable to carry a soul; therefore, it can be suggested that in regard to animals, it is more a question of cognitive capacity, other than the question of a sole.  (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

The aspects of memory, cognition, and awareness that are often attributed to the continuation of the self in the sense of the soul are fundamentally dependent upon real world physical and biological functions such as brain activity and the connection of the nervous system.  If these systems are tampered with or altered, then there can also be essential changes to the way that people perceive the world.  Those who have been through drug or health problems often have an altered perspective due to damage that has been caused to the brain.

Scientific data points to the fact that these alterations occur throughout the medical community, and there has been a lot of documentation concerning the changes that take place in these situations.  Essentially the arguments against the idea of the soul come down to the fact that there is evidence that the mind is dependent upon the physical aspects of reality.  However, there is no evidence to the contrary.  There is no empirical information that points to the idea that the physical body is somehow dependent upon the mind.  This presents a less than credible basis for the notions that many non-theists have come to regarding the nonexistence of the soul.

The most fundamental problem with basing these decisions upon scientific observations is the issue of meaning.  While it is possible to create large frameworks of understanding concerning the physical world, our certainty of this information can never be absolute.Furthermore, the notion of the self is something that these individuals are not fully taking into account.  While it seems evident that a large amount of complex processes could give rise to some type of awareness, the idea of self-awareness is difficult to grasp the reality of.

Science, despite all of the progress that it has made, has still failed to determine exactly where the idea of the self originates, or whether it is unique to humanity, or simply those with complex enough minds to comprehend it.  This could indicate that there is no physical manifestation of the notion of the self, and it, instead, stems from some deeper, more intrinsic understanding of the self that does not necessarily originate in the physical manifestation of matter.

Works Cited

Akinola Mohammed, Akomolafe. A Critique of Descartes’ Mind-Body Dualism. Kritike. Vol. 6. No. 1. 2012.

Brown, C.  (2009).  Descartes: Summary of Some Major Points.  Trinity University. Retrieved from: http://www.trinity.edu/cbrown/modern/descartesMajorPoints.html

Haldane, E.S. René Descartes:The Passions of the Soul. Gentile. 2008.

Hickson, M.W.  Descartes on the Immortality of the Soul. http://www.academia.edu/3318037/Descartes_on_the_Immortality_of_the_soul

Pasnau, Robert. The Mind Soul-Problem. Ashgatebundel. 2006.

Standord Encyclopedia of Philosphy. (2014).  Animal Consciousness. Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness-animal/