Body and Mind

Question 1

Definition of the Body?

Answer 1

The physical component and extent of an organism or object

Question 2

Definition of Consciousness?

Answer 2

The state of being awake or of having experiences

Question 3

Definition of Dualism?

Answer 3

Theory

Argues that mind and body are distinct

Possibly 2 Different Entities

Question 4

Definition of the Mind?

Answer 4

Faculty of Thought

Awareness + Consciousness

Question 5

Definition of the Mind-Body Problem?

Answer 5

Philosophical Problem between defining the relationship of the Mind and the Body`

Question 6

Definition of Monism?

Answer 6

Theory

Suggests the mind and the Body are one thing

United

Question 7

Definition of the Soul?

Answer 7

Enduring essence or non-physical part of the human being

Question 8

What is the common argument for the Mind?

Answer 8

1. ) An obvious sense in which we are more than physical bodies
2. ) We understand humans as different from other objects
3. ) `It is immoral to treat human beings as objects
4. ) Common Assumption that there is a special value “inside” humans

Question 9

2 Characteristics of Monism?

Answer 9

Makes links between physical; and mental aspects of humans

Support for this view arises from empiricists, who emphasise the existence of primary physical evidence

Question 10

Ancient Indian Hinduism view of the Mind and the Body?

Answer 10

Body and the Mind as friends and foes

1. ) All humans seem to be aware of their bodies
2. ) This is through sensory inputs and being able to control what the body does
3. ) Example “ you could have a conscientious intention to read a book, say you will do it, and then go and do it”
4. ) The executive part of ourselves is the body and the chief is the mind
5. ) This suggests that they have a relationship with each other but aren’t fully connected

Question 11

Criticisms of the Ancient Indian Hinduism view of the Mind and the Body?

Answer 11

From a scientific perspective, such desires simply reflect physiological needs that can be understood, through the science of nutrition

No Conflicts Exist

Question 12

Counter Criticisms of the Ancient Indian Hinduism view of the Mind and Body?

Answer 12

Asceticism –> Practice of Subduing the body denying the things it desires: food

(This is limited NOT prohibited)

Question 13

Why is Asceticism good?

Answer 13

Asceticism if good because it acts as a barrier to a concentrated mind and so the practice of asceticism enables one to experience

Question 14

Counter Counter Criticism of Ancient Indian Practices

?

Answer 14

Surely Asceticism distracts us from our needs

One can’t focus with Asceticism

Question 15

What is the Ancient Greek view of the Mind and the Body?

Answer 15

We can use Socrate’s argument from Plato in the Phaedo

Question 16

Argument of Affinity?

Answer 16

“Psyche” –> Life, Breath and Soul

The translation “soul” is chosen in English because it conveys what Socrates is talking about:

1. ) Some Immortal and Immaterial essence in the human being that will survive (even death)
2. ) Socrates regards for it distinct to the body (Dualism)
3. ) Soul = Awareness and Consciousness of a human

The Soul has closest resemblance to things invisible, unchanging, uniform and things that do not die

The body by contrast has closest resemblance to things, visible, changing and mortal

Therefore, the body will die but the soul won’t

Question 17

Criticisms of the Affinity Argument?

Answer 17

Although the soul can contemplate abstract an immaterial idea, it can also contemplate worldly and physical matters, the body, death etc.

So does it really have an affinity w immortality

Question 18

Reductive Physicalism?

Answer 18

. This is knows as Reductive Physicalism which is the idea that the world is made up of only physical stuff including us. For example, a metal rod was accidently driven into the rod of a person called Phineas Gage thus damaging his brain however Gage’s personality change from a respectful gentleman to a ignorant and selfish gentleman. Therefore, we can suggest that our personality and mind can change due to physical things. Consequently, the mind resides in the physical parts of the body meaning that we don’t have an immortal soul.

Question 19

What is Physicalism?

Answer 19

Physicalist theories of the mind argue that the universe is made of just one kind of thing: physical stuff.

According to physicalism, everything that exists – including the mind and mental states – is either a physical thing or supervenes on physical things. This means that two physically identical things must be mentally identical.

Question 20

What is Substance Dualism?

Answer 20

Substance dualism says there are two completely different kinds of substance in our universe:

Mental substances
Physical substances
Physical substances are things like the trees, cars, houses, etc. Your body – your arms, legs, etc. – is a physical thing as well.

The brain is part of the body, hence it is also physical. But dualists deny that the mind is the same thing as the brain. Instead, dualists argue that the mind is something completely different to the brain – something non-physical.

Question 21

What does Descartes say about Dualism?

Answer 21

Descartes’ conceivability argument can be summarised as:

I have a clear and distinct idea of my mind as a thinking thing that is not extended in space

I have a clear and distinct idea of my body as a non-thinking thing that is extended in space

Anything I can conceive of clearly and distinctly is something that God could create

So, God could create my mind as a thinking thing that is not extended in space and my body as a non-thinking thing that is extended in space

So, it is possible for mind and body to exist independent of each other

So, mind and body are two separate substances

In other words, Descartes is saying that it is conceivable – and therefore possible – for mind and body to exist separately. He then takes this to show that mind and body are separate things.

Question 22

Criticisms of Descartes Conceivability Argument?

Answer 22

What is conceivable may not be (physically) possible

Just because we can imagine the mind floating around independently of a body, this doesn’t mean it is physically possible. It might be logically possible – i.e. it doesn’t involve a logical contradiction – but just because something is logically possible, this doesn’t mean it is physically possible!

For example: it is not logically possible for a triangle to have 4 sides because it involves a logical contradiction.

Question 23

What is the Masked Man Fallacy?

Answer 23

Another response to the conceivability argument attacks Descartes’ inference from the claim that mind without body is conceivable to the conclusion that mind exists without body in reality. The fallibility of this inference can be shown with the following example:

I conceive of Batman as a caped crusader
I conceive of Bruce Wayne as a billionaire who is not a caped crusader
Therefore, Batman is not Bruce Wayne
If you know the Batman story, Batman is Bruce Wayne’s secret identity. So the conclusion is clearly false: Batman is Bruce Wayne.

So, even though it may be conceivable that Batman is someone else, this tells us nothing about how things are in reality. To think otherwise is to fall for the masked man fallacy.

Just because it’s conceivable that these are two separate people, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are two separate people in reality

The reason this argument is fallacious is because it switches from talking about ideas to talking about things themselves. But, like the Batman example, sometimes our ideas are mistaken and reality is different from our idea of it. We can argue that Descartes’ conceivability argument makes the same mistake as the Batman example:

Just because you have an idea of Batman and Bruce Wayne as separate people, this doesn’t mean they are separate people

Similarly, just because you have an idea that the mind and body are separate things, this doesn’t necessarily mean they are separate things

Question 24

What is Property Dualism?

Answer 24

Property dualism is the view that there is that some minds have non-physical properties.

Question 25

How does Property Dualism differ from Substance Dualism?

Answer 25

It doesn’t go as far as substance dualism in claiming that the mind is completely non-physical, but it differs from physicalism in that property dualists believe a complete description of the physical universe would not be a complete description of the entire universe. Instead, property dualists believe that a complete physical description of the universe would miss out qualia

Question 26

What is the Zombie Argument?

Answer 26

Philosophical zombies are conceivable If philosophical zombies are conceivable then philosophical zombies are metaphysically possible If philosophical zombies are metaphysically possible then qualia are non-physical If qualia are non-physical then property dualism is true Therefore, property dualism is true

Question 27

Criticisms of the Zombie Argument?

Answer 27

Zombies are not conceivable Physicalists can respond that if we had enough physical knowledge we would be able to understand what we currently call ‘qualia’ in purely physical terms. In other words, the only reason zombies seem conceivable is because we are confused or missing some important information. The conceivability of a physical duplicate without qualia is just an illusion – albeit a very powerful one. The reason zombies seem conceivable is because we’re labouring under a false illusion that qualia are these spooky non-physical things. Once we understand that qualia are, in fact, just physical things, then it becomes inconceivable to imagine a physically identical being that lacks these physical features. Imagining a philosophical zombie would be like saying “imagine something that is physically identical but that isn’t physically identical” – it would be a contradiction, and contradictions aren’t conceivable. It would be like trying to imagine a married bachelor or a triangle with 4 sides.

Question 28

FRANK JACKSON: THE KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT (MARY) (The criticism of Physicalism)

Answer 28

Mary is confined to a black-and-white room, is educated through black-and-white books and lectures relayed on a black-and-white television. In this way she learns everything there is to know about the physical nature of the world. She knows all the physical facts about us and our environment, in a wide sense of ‘physical’ which includes everything in completed physics, chemistry, and neurophysiology, and all there is to know about the causal and relational facts consequent upon all this, including of course functional roles. If physicalism is true, she knows all there is to know. So, in short, the argument looks something like this: Mary knows all the physical facts about colour Mary does not know what it feels like to see colour Therefore, what it feels like to see colour is not a physical fact Physicalism says that all facts are physical facts Therefore, physicalism is false Physicalism is taken to be false due to the supposed existence of non-physical facts. These non-physical facts are facts about non-physical properties, i.e. qualia. If such non-physical properties exist, then property dualism is true.

Question 29

Criticisms of Mary Jackson?

Answer 29

We can accept that Mary learns something new when she leaves the black and white room but reject Jackson’s claim that this new knowledge is non-physical. Instead, we might argue, Mary gains new ability knowledge. There is nothing spooky or non-physical about knowing how to ride a bike. The fact that people are able to ride bicycles is not used as an argument against physicalism. And we can imagine a similar case to the Mary example. However, this time, Mary learns all the physical facts about riding a bicycle (and all the related causal and relational facts) from books and videos, etc. without ever actually touching a bike for herself. When Mary is given a bicycle for the first time she probably won’t be able to ride it – even though she knows all the physical facts about riding bicycles. This is because knowledge of how to ride a bike isn’t the kind of knowledge you can learn from facts in books. It’s ability knowledge. And ability knowledge is a kind of physical knowledge. Applied to the original Mary case, some argue when Mary sees red for the first time all she does is gain new abilities. She gains the ability to imagine red, for example. She also gains the ability to distinguish red sensory experiences from green sensory experiences.