Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Physicalism V Dualism-the Mind/Body Problem

Good Essays
1317 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Physicalism V Dualism-the Mind/Body Problem
Prompt 2- Physicalism v Dualism

In philosophy there are a number of different views when it comes to the mind/body problem. The mind/body problem is the problem of explaining how the mind relates to the body. One of these views is called dualism. Dualists utilize Leibniz’s law to support their argument that the mind and body are two different things. On the other hand there is also another group of philosophers called physicalists. Physicalists claim that everything including psychological aspects are tangible and they use a concept called modes of presentation to support their beliefs against dualism. In this paper I will be further explaining Leibniz’s law and how it is used by dualism. I will also go into the modes of presentation concept and how physicalists use it as a response to dualism.

Leibniz’s law, also known as the indiscernibility of identicals, states that if A and B are one and the same thing, then A must have all the same properties of B and vice versa. For example If Spiderman can shoot webs out of his wrists, and Peter Parker is Spiderman, Then Peter Parker can also shoot webs out of his wrists. Here A is Spiderman and B is Peter Parker. Leibniz’s law would also imply that if A and B have different properties, then A and B cannot be one and the same thing. For example, let’s say that I look out the window and I see Spiderman swinging by on his spider web. I wonder who Spiderman is. Now as Spiderman is swinging by, I see my buddy Harry Osborn standing besides me. Using Leibniz’s law, I reason like this: Spiderman is swinging by on a spider web. Osborn is not swinging by on a spider web; he is standing right besides me. In this example, Spiderman is A, and Osborn is B. Spiderman has a property that Osborn does not, so using the law, we can confidently say that Osborn is not Spiderman and Spiderman is not Osborn. When it comes to supporting their beliefs, dualists specifically employ the second type of example, that A is not one and the same with B.

Dualist’s believe that the basic components of the universe consist of fundamentally two different types of things. There are purely physical objects and properties, and there are also purely mental or non-physical objects and properties. The mental or non-physical objects being the mind aspects (e.g. beliefs, desires, pain), and the physical objects being the body aspects (e.g. limbs, brains, organs). No non-physical/mental objects have shape, color, mass, etc… but all physical objects do. You cannot say that you’re beliefs are pink or that your senses are big, but you can say that your brain is pink and your arm is big. We also know that non-physical/mental aspects can have intensities, and that physical objects cannot. For example you cannot say that you’re brain or its parts are intense, but you can say that you’re headache is intense. Giving physical objects aspects that only non-physical things hold or vice versa is an example of a category mistake. Dualists utilize the examples of category mistakes and Leibniz’s law as arguments for dualism.

The way dualists use Leibniz’s law is by saying the following: F is true for the non-physical/mental thing; F is not true of the Physical thing; therefore the non physical/mental thing is not the same as the physical. Where the non-physical/mental is A, the physical is B, and F is something that if attributed to A is true, but if attributed to B would be a category mistake and is therefore false. For example: Your headache is painful; your brain and its parts are not painful; therefore your headache is not your brain or its parts. This can be used the other way, where A is the physical and B is the non-physical/mental. For instance you can say: Your brain and its parts have mass and color; your psychology and its aspects have no mass or color; therefore your psychology is not your brain or its parts. There are numerous other examples like these that dualists use to show how physical properties are not the same as non-physical properties and how they are two completely different things. These are also the types of arguments that physicalists attack and use to undermine the dualist belief.

Physicalists, as I mentioned in the beginning, claim that everything in the universe is physical and that all of the psychological or mental aspects are also physical. This argument is of course completely opposite of what dualism claims and is in fact a response to dualism. Physicalists use something called the modes of presentation in an attempt to show how dualists are thinking of things in the wrong way. They say that the mind is identical to the brain just like Spiderman is identical to Peter Parker. They are presented in different ways but they are essentially the same person and can do the same things. The modes of presentation concept and how physicalists use it as a counterexample to dualism and can be explained with the following example: To Mary Jane, Spiderman swings around New York using his super powers to fight crime and attempt to keep the justice in the city; Also to MJ, Peter Parker does not swing around New York using his super powers to fight crime and attempt to keep the justice; therefore, to MJ, Spiderman is not Peter Parker and Peter Parker is not Spiderman. But, we know that in fact Peter Parker and Spiderman are one and the same, MJ, through her ignorance fails to realize this. In this case MJ is committing something known as intensional fallacy because she fails to recognize that Spiderman and Peter Parker are the same person, or have the same extension. Intension is the way that a word or name is linked to an extension. Extension is everything to which a name or a term can be applied to. So the extension of Spiderman can be applied to a man that has super powers that allow him to shoot webs out of his wrists and climb walls, just to name a few. So you can say that an extension of Spiderman is Peter Parker. That’s why MJ would be committing intensional fallacy, because she doesn’t believe that the intension attached to Spiderman and Peter Parker has the same extension.

The way physicalists use this against dualism is by saying that in their arguments, dualists are in fact committing the same intensional fallacy that MJ is committing with Spiderman and Peter Parker. Physicalists claim that your brain has a physical mode of presentation as well as a psychological/mental mode of presentation. They are two different modes of presentation, but like Spiderman and Peter Parker, they are one and the same thing. We are only able to see the physical mode of presentation from the way we look at the brain, but we are unable to see the psychological/mental mode because it is beyond us. For example, physicalists would argue that your belief that you are reading this paper is identical to a part of your brain; they are just unable to pinpoint which part that is exactly, but of course they say it will eventually be possible to do so. They also say that if you look at your beliefs in the psychological/mental mode of presentation, it doesn’t have color, but in physical mode it does. We have to think of beliefs and all the psychological aspects in a physical mode of presentation. Thinking this way would allude to the conclusion that whatever is true of the brain is also true of the mind.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Chapters 6 And 7 Module 2

    • 1747 Words
    • 3 Pages

    bodies in motion. He attempted to show “perception” where all other mental phenomena are derived ,…

    • 1747 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Descartes argues the mind is seperate from the physical body. With advances in nueroscience and the contious brain injuries gives strong evidence in supporting materialism. Defining what Cartesian dualists mean by the brain, mind, body and soul, an argument by Cartesians dualists may be reached. Responding to evidence confronting brain injuries from claims that the brain is only ‘an instrument of the soul’. Concluding there is a simultaneous support for materialism resulting from neuroscience and the Cartesian dualism argument, may be wrong.…

    • 227 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rene Descartes was a brilliant thinker, philosopher, scientist, physiologist, and early psychologist whose theory of mind-body connection has become an integral part of modern medicine (Goodwin, 2008). His dualist view, asserted the mind was ethereal and autonomous in relation to the physical and strictly material body, and to account for their interaction, he proposed the pineal gland was where the intersection of the two transpired (Goodwin, 2008). He theorized the mechanistic, reflexive nature of certain human behaviors, although his one caveat was that reasoning and thoughts were unique properties of the human soul (Wickens, 2005). Descartes 's work laid some of the fundamental parameters for modern thought in psychology, encouraged further research on the localization of brain function, and promoted further experimental research of the nervous system (Goodwin, 2008).…

    • 518 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Epiphenomenalism Analysis

    • 565 Words
    • 3 Pages

    For instance, the idea of supervenience can give us an account in terms of relations or dependence, and could be of use as another argument to support a physicalist view. Davidson (1970/202) maintains that: “…mental characteristics are in some sense dependent, or supervenient, on physical characteristics” (p. 119). He makes the significant remark that “Dependence or supervenience of this kind does not entail reducibility” (Davidson, 1970/2002, p.119). However, reduction seems to be is one of the keys points that define physicalism, for example, Papineau (1993) maintains that “physicalism requires reductionism” (p. 2). Nonetheless, so, if the main criterion for physicality is reducibility, how can it be that the mental, although physical, cannot be reduced to physics? If a mental event is identical with a brain event, then reduction could be a valid methodological approach: for instance Place (1956) or Smart (1959) argue that consciousness are process of the brain. However, Putnam (1967), Davidson (1970) and Fodor (1974) present strong arguments against such view. The next section will further discuss the problems of reductionism that encourage non-reductive…

    • 565 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Among Descartes’ many notable arguments, in the Sixth Meditation he makes a case for the real distinction between mind and body. This idea that mind and body are distinct was not common during Descartes’ time and conflicted directly with the popularly accepted scholastic view of the human being as a hylomorphic substance. The argument of the Sixth Meditation draws on much of Descartes’ own work concerning substance, attributes and distinction. In this paper, I will argue that he arrives at the conclusion that mind and body are in fact distinct by a categorical syllogism, focusing primarily on defending the minor premise that mind and body can be conceived as separate.…

    • 1156 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mind-Body Dualism

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Humans seem to be an entity made up by a combination of both physical properties and mental properties. Folk psychology of soul proposed by Bering (2006) suggested “common-sense mind-body dualism” is a cognitive adaptation that evolved through natural selection. According to this quote, it is believed that individual is fundamentally constituted of body, mind and volition. For centuries, people have tried to discover what makes an individual from philosophical, psychological and physiological perspectives. At different stages of this knowledge in understanding human beings, behaviourism, humanism and the study of consciousness will be critically evaluated in this discussion.…

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Australian Materialism

    • 1888 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The views of the Australian materialists on the identification of the mind and the body, simply stated, are that states and processes of the mind are identical to states and processes of the brain. Henceforth these philosophers (for the purpose of this article I will be referring in particular to Smart and Armstrong’s views on the matter) assume the position that all processes of the mind and experiences are due to physical reactions occurring in the brain and that these physical processes can account for the mental states that one may encounter. Smart’s takes a Materialist stance regarding the identification of the mind and body, and a more scientific one at that, believing that everything…

    • 1888 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    The Synopsis: Star Trek Episode “The Measure of a Man” deals with the thought that android could have physical and mental properties. In order to fully understand or evaluate this we have to have a clear understanding of the Mind/Body Problems and solutions. Humans are material objects consisting of physical and mental properties. Physical properties examples are height, weight, color, shape or size and mental properties are awareness, consciousness, feeling, thinking, emotions and senses. The problem arises because these properties interact where intentional or unintentional continuously. Hasker discusses several mind/body solutions such as idealism, materialism, behaviorism, dualism, and emergentism.…

    • 678 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Objection to Physicalism

    • 1272 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Following contemporary philosophy, physicalism is the theory that everything in our universe is entirely physical and nothing is non-physical. In Frank Jackson’s well known objection to physicalism, “What Mary didn’t know,” he states it as “not the noncontroversial thesis that the actual world is largely physical, but the challenging thesis that it is entirely physical.”(Jackson 281) Already physicalism finds itself in the difficult position of proving that all things are physical, even though the common belief would be that there are some non-physical aspects of our universe. The center to Jackson’s argument is that knowledge of an experience (known as phenomenal qualia) or knowing what it is like to experience something is in fact non-physical knowledge about other people. Philosopher David Lewis goes on to provide a physicalist response to Jackson in his work titled “Knowing What It’s Like” by claiming that “knowing what it’s like is not the possession of information at all.”(Lewis 1) In this paper, I will create a further objection against Lewis because I believe physicalism to be false. I will do this by challenging Lewis’s claim that a person only gains the abilities to recognize, imagine, and predict behavior due to an experience.…

    • 1272 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Mind-Body problem

    • 1454 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Many theories have been challenged throughout the history of psychology. Mind vs. Body is one of the most important issues that has formed the basic foundation in this field today. One of the central questions in psychology and philosophy concerns the mind-body problem: Is the mind part of the body, or the body part of the mind? If they are distinct, then how do they interact? And which of the two is in charge? (McLeod, 2007). Philosophers have examined the relationship between the two and have proposed a variety of approaches to support their arguments.…

    • 1454 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mach believes humans think in an economical manner where past experiences and knowledge are systematically reorganized to fit a pattern (Mach 211). Rather than analysing each experience in detail, humans refer to similar or related experiences as groups, which allows for the “least expenditure of thought” (Mach 197). In line with this mentality springs the concept of ‘things’ and ‘bodies’. Mach states that colours, sounds, temperatures, etc. are called sensations (Mach 208-209). When certain sensations are present repeatedly, they would fit into a pattern. To allow for future reference on this knowledge within the mind, the pattern receives a label. An example would be when a person sees an orange, bouncy, sphere object which has a mildly rough texture, the label ‘basketball’ springs to mind. The ‘basketball’ would not be a physical object; it would simply be a “mental symbol” for the sensations and Mach states that “symbols do not exist outside of thought” (Mach 201).…

    • 968 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Philosophers have undertaken several studies to analyse the nature human beings and this has given rise to the formulation of many speculations and theories about the nature of the mind, body and the relationship in between, if any. This is referred to the mind-body problem (P. Lloyd, 1953). Focus is therefore made on the identity theory of mind and brain basically identifying the mind with the brain ascribing the different functions of the mind to that of the neural brain processes.…

    • 552 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The relation between body and mind is the source of disputation of dualism and monism among philosophers. The supporters of dualism believe that the body and mind are separate and opposite. Also, the body is…

    • 1561 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mind Body Debate

    • 614 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Philosophers have been debating for centuries the relationship between the mind and the body and whether they are separate entities, or if they are one. This is known as the mind/body problem. If the mind being our consciousness and the body being our brain is separate parts, do they relate to each other or work together? If they are one, do they depend on each other? The idea that the mind and body are one is called monism. The idea that the mind and body are separate is called dualism (Newall, 2005).…

    • 614 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Both Michel De Montaigne and John Donne argue that the cultivation of the mind is linked to the well being of the body. Both argue that a mind void of proper enrichment and education will lead to an unhealthy body. However, Montaigne argues that the appropriate means of “education and enrichment” are studying and following the works of other great thinkers of history. Additionally, Montaigne declares imagination to be the impetus for the downfall of the body. Conversely, Donne argues that a mind groomed in imagination is the proper mode of finding bodily health. In their writings, both Montaigne and Donne are seeking a unity between the mind and the body. By comparing Montaigne’s Essays and the poetry of Donne, it is evident that the means for unifying the mind and body can vary for different people.…

    • 1919 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays