David Hume Dualism Analysis
They both see dualism in a different way. Descartes think that the body and the mind are two different things .He also thinks that it is very possible for one to exist without the other one. For Seale, it is completely the opposite. He said that the mind and body are the same thing.
2) For Thomas,the way he sees then mind is emotions, thoughts and even ideas and the only thing that is in the body is moton and it was different for Berkeley.
3) Yes, it does imply to it because we let ourselves get attached on worldly things or on material objects.
4) David Hume believed that the self is an illusion, which mean like the way we perceive ourselves is not the real self and it is the same for Milarepa’s, he thinks the self is nothing.
5) I don’t think …show more content…
Therefore, he starved to death. Clearly, he meant that we are like the donkey and we are do not have free will.
8) He realized that he is free because the brothers said that following God makes things easier.
9) We have the capacity to do whatever we want to do (free will) and people who do not believe in God are outside determinism.
10) Anselm is the one who came up with the ontological argument about the existence of God. He was trying to prove that we could believe in God without seeing him. Unlike Gaunilo, who did not share the same point of view .He thought this was absurd because there is no proof that he exists if we cannot see him.
11) Their beliefs are not really different from each other. Freud thought that believing in God is a way not to think about death, it is like we are imagination him. And Nietzsche also thought that we created God and that only weak people believing in him.
12) Tolstoy and Kierkegaard are completely the opposite of Freud and Nietzsche. They believed that God is real and he exists and they said that life has a purpose when you have God in your
2) For Thomas,the way he sees then mind is emotions, thoughts and even ideas and the only thing that is in the body is moton and it was different for Berkeley.
3) Yes, it does imply to it because we let ourselves get attached on worldly things or on material objects.
4) David Hume believed that the self is an illusion, which mean like the way we perceive ourselves is not the real self and it is the same for Milarepa’s, he thinks the self is nothing.
5) I don’t think …show more content…
Therefore, he starved to death. Clearly, he meant that we are like the donkey and we are do not have free will.
8) He realized that he is free because the brothers said that following God makes things easier.
9) We have the capacity to do whatever we want to do (free will) and people who do not believe in God are outside determinism.
10) Anselm is the one who came up with the ontological argument about the existence of God. He was trying to prove that we could believe in God without seeing him. Unlike Gaunilo, who did not share the same point of view .He thought this was absurd because there is no proof that he exists if we cannot see him.
11) Their beliefs are not really different from each other. Freud thought that believing in God is a way not to think about death, it is like we are imagination him. And Nietzsche also thought that we created God and that only weak people believing in him.
12) Tolstoy and Kierkegaard are completely the opposite of Freud and Nietzsche. They believed that God is real and he exists and they said that life has a purpose when you have God in your