self

Question 1

Descartes view of the Self?

Answer 1

There is a continous self –> this is a thinking entity

Justification –> “Cogito, ergo sum” (“I think, therefore I am”) argument.

• Descartes believes we can doubt everything else but not our own existence –> existence is based on something other than the external world.
• We can doubt the existence of the physical world, other people, and even our own bodies, but we cannot doubt that we exist as thinking beings.
• Descartes believed that the self was located in the mind because the mind was the only thing that he could be certain of.
• Liebniz’s Law:

If two things are the same (1) They need to have the same properties

If they do not have the same properties they cannot be the same.

Therefore, Descarte’s Self is independent, solitary and the mind is world dependent

Question 2

COA of Descartes argument of the Self?

Answer 2

• If the mind and the body are so different then how can they interact with each other.

The idea of a non-physical mind operating in a physical universe seems self defeating

Gilber Ryle “ghost in a machine”.

Pineal Gland counter but unconvincing.

• Neural Dependence - Mind is heavily reliant on the brain and not the other way around. MRI scans can identify parts of the brain that are active.

Question 3

What does Hume belief about the self?

Answer 3

• Self - Not a substantial entity (subject to change)

Empiricist - Knowledge ultimately comes from experience.

If the self existed we must have empirical data to substantiate the claim. For there to be a self, it must manifest itself in a form of an idea, but there is no “such idea”.

Bundle of perceptions that are constantly changing

Self is a social construct used to make sense of our experiences.

Hume believes we impose a **sense of unity **by assuming that all our experiences belong to the same self.

Question 4

Criticisms of Hume’s Self?

Answer 4

This brings us to the final and, perhaps, the most problematic objection to the bundle theory of substance.

If a substance is a collection of non-substantial, concrete qualities, what exactly holds these qualities together?

Why do we not perceive random qualities “floating about”? Why do they collect into substances?

DUALISM good because it has a good metaphysical explanation of how our self is held together (it is held together by a substance)

Many answer by saying that the parts of a collection are unified due to a causal connection with one another.

BUT

This implies something similar to mereological essentialism, if the bundle theorists insists that all of the elements within the collection are causally dependent on one another.

In this scenario, if one of the elements is destroyed, then all of these elements would be destroyed.

A substance would possess all of its properties essentially.

Question 5

What do proponents of monism believe?

Answer 5

A person can be explained in terms of a single substance

Dennett - Functionalism.

Mind can be explained fully through its functions.

The Mind is not necessarily a phyiscal object but rather a way of talking about some important functions like consciousness that happen to be manifested into human brains.

Hilary Putnam analogy –> Human minds are the software and the brain is the hardware