Criticism Of The Approach

Question 1

Substance dualism

Criticisms of substance dualism- Dependence of mind on the brain

Answer 1

Evidence from neuro-science, strongly supports the claim mind depends on the brain:

• Modern imaging techniques show that there are precise correlations between specific types of brain activity and types of conscious experience
• If your brain is damaged you may lose certain mental capacities eg memories, recognising faces and understanding language
• Psychoactive drugs also effect consciousness; drinking alcohol impairs maths ability and changes mood
• These observations best explained by supposing the mind is not just causally influence by the brain but depends on it, these observations support the idea of a dependence relation

Question 2

Substance dualism

Criticisms of substance dualism- Evolutionary history a

Answer 2

• Modern biology also supports the idea the mind depends on the brain; theory that human beings evolved from other life forms over billions of years is a physical one- all the capacities and properties of living creatures should therefore be ultimately explained in physical terms
• Evolutionary explanation of humans beings minds must be explained in terms of its service to the survival of the species
• We can observe how our mental capacities of different creatures are related to the evolution of their brains from common ancestral tools and give them evolutionary advantages
• Can also observe how mental life of other animals is related to the structure of their brains in ways that make no reference to any non physical substances
• This explanation is strongly supported by scientific evidence vs mind being a distinct substance= lots of remaining questions eg how/why this non physical substance was created/ associated with a certain animal etc
• Ockham’s razor strongly suggests an explanation in terms of just one substance- physical