Descartes Dualism

To begin with, this essay will look at both Descartes understanding of the mind and body and whether or not the reasons for the mind and body being distinct are plausible. It will look at the various arguments and understandings in defence of dualism as well as look at its flaws to then come to a conclusion on whether Descartes does in fact give good reasons for believing that the mind could exist without the body. Firstly, Descartes’ ‘method of doubt’ attempts to ‘defeat the sceptic’ in his beliefs that everything we experience is simply a false or inaccurate perception of the world around us. The sceptic would argue that often, we do not doubt what exists around us, we claim that we know some things to be certain through our five senses.
(Peter Smith & O.R. Jones, The Philosophy of Mind: an Introduction, Cambridge University Press, 1986, ch.3, p.32). However, Smith and Jones give an example similar to that of Descartes ‘evil demon’ to portray the idea that the ‘reality’ you experience through the senses cannot be entirely trusted. This example is referred to as the ‘brain in a vat’.
Smith and Jones describe that if your brain was taken hostage by a ‘mad scientist’ and ‘placed in a vat’ all whilst you were asleep, and was controlled by a ‘mega-computer’ yet you are experiencing everything that you were experiencing before your brain was taken out of your body, it would be impossible to determine whether you are truly experiencing what you believe you are, or are simply a ‘brain in a vat’. (Peter Smith & O.R. Jones, The Philosophy of Mind: an Introduction, Cambridge University Press, 1986, ch.3, pp.32-33). However, Descartes attempts to counter this argument using the ‘method of doubt’. He argues that we are able to doubt everything in existence, the world around us as well as our physical bodies, but we cannot doubt that we exist. The fact that we are doubting our own existence entails that we are thinking, and we cannot doubt that we are thinking, thus we must exist. (Peter Smith & O.R. Jones, The Philosophy of Mind: an Introduction,
Cambridge University Press, 1986, ch.3, p.35). This line of thought as argued by Descartes supposes that not only are the mind and body distinct, but also that existence resides within the mind. So far, it seems as though Descartes has defeated the sceptic in arguing that existence cannot be doubted since the ‘evil demon’ or the ‘mad scientist’ could deceive one about having a body but not about thinking, thus existing. (Peter Smith & O.R. Jones, The Philosophy of Mind: an Introduction, Cambridge University Press, 1986, ch.3, p.37). Using the ‘method of doubt’, arguing for the mind/body distinctness and thought being the core of existence, Descartes has defeated the sceptic and given reason to not doubt existence.
However, a flaw can be found in the way in which Descartes presents his argument. Smith and Jones pose a similar argument to that of Descartes. The argument describes Margaret Thatcher waking up having forgotten who she is, she thinks she could be prime minister but is not certain. Using Descartes line of argument, she can doubt that she is prime minister, but she cannot doubt that she exists therefore her existence is separate from the the prime minister. The problem with this line of argument is that the conclusion is false and therefore is invalid. (Peter Smith & O.R. Jones, The Philosophy of Mind: an Introduction, Cambridge University Press, 1986, ch.3, p.40). This therefore undermines Descartes dualism and gives little credibility to the idea that the mind could exist without the
body. Moreover, Descartes uses ‘clear and distinct ideas’ to give further reason to why the mind could exist without the body. He not only argues that thought is the essence of a person but he has a “…clear and distinct idea of himself as a thinking thing.” (Margaret D Wilson, “Descartes: The Epistemological Argument for Mind-Body Distinctness”, Nous 10, 1976, p.4). According to Descartes, whatever can be ‘clearly and distinctly’ understood is brought about by God and cannot be doubted, it is true knowledge. Therefore the idea that he is a thinking being is certain. (Margaret D Wilson, “Descartes: The Epistemological Argument for Mind-Body Distinctness”, Nous 10, 1976, p.6) Descartes understands the mind and the body clearly and distinctly in that the mind is purely thought and the body is ‘extension’. From this, Descartes concludes that we know that the mind can exist apart from the body. However, it could be argued that even though ‘clear and distinct’ ideas can’t be doubted, they could still be false, just because we cannot doubt something does not automatically make it true. (Nick Jones, 2016, ‘I Think Therefore I Am’ PHIL 1040, lecture 9).