Category Archives: Philosophy

Arts, Philosophy, Science

(Philosophy) Mind and body

PHILOSOPHY OF RENE DESCARTES

Intro: By drawing a distinction between the mind and the body, and prioritising reason over observation, Rene Descartes laid the foundations for modern rationalist philosophy

Cartesian Dualism

DESCARTES regarded the ability to reason as the defining feature of human beings. He believed that we have this ability because we possess a mind, or soul, which he saw as distinct from the physical body. He distinguished the mind from the body while engaged in his “method of doubt”, which was his unique method of philosophical enquiry.

This method of doubt was a sceptical approach, and led Descartes to conclude that our senses are far from reliable. Truth, he decided, can only be arrived at through reason. His claim “Cogito ergo sum” (“I am thinking, therefore I exist”) expressed his realisation that the only thing that he could be certain of was that he existed – that in order to think at all, he must exist. In addition, he realised that he was a thing that thinks – but not a physical thing, for he could doubt that his physical body was real. He concluded that there were two distinct parts of his existence – an unthinking physical body, and a thinking, non-physical mind.

This led Descartes to conclude that there are two different types of substance – one material and one immaterial – in the universe. This view became known as Cartesian dualism. It raised the question of how the two substances interact, which is still debated today. Descartes claimed that mind and body “commingle” in the pineal gland of the brain, but he failed to show how they do so, and for many, including Thomas Hobbes, this failure undermined Descartes’ theory.

In Descartes’ day, sophisticated machines were being constructed – some even behaved like living things – and scientists believed that the world was mechanical, too: animals, the weather, and the stars were seen as machines whose movements could in principle be predicted. Descartes shared this view about everything except human beings: he claimed that we alone have the God-given attribute of reason.

The Pineal Gland

Descartes believed that the mind and the body are two distinct entities, but conceded that there had to be some interaction between the two. In particular, he thought that the mind exercises control over the body. Indeed, our rational freedom – our ability to choose how to act – is a definingly human characteristic.

However, there must be a place where our minds interact with our bodies. Descartes suggested this is the pineal gland, which is located in the centre of the brain. He described it as “the principal seat of the soul, and the place in which all our thoughts are formed”.

Need To Know

. An influential mathematician as well as philosopher, Descartes invented the system of Cartesian coordinates and established the field of analytical geometry.

In a letter to Mersenne (1640) Descartes wrote: “With me, everything turns into mathematics.”

. According to Descartes, the mind, or soul, is unique to human beings. Other animals are purely physical beings, and behave in predetermined ways.

. Descartes’ mind/body dualism is regarded as the foundation of modern Western philosophy. However, in the 19th and 20th centuries, materialism increasingly became the norm.

Mind And Soul

For Descartes, the mind is the immaterial part of our being – the thinking thing that has the ability to have ideas. It is not located in space, and can doubt everything that it perceives – even the reality of the eyes through which it sees.

Because the mind is immaterial, it is not subject to physical decay. It is therefore eternal, and synonymous with the immortal soul or spirit. For Descartes, dualism was compatible with religious faith.

The Immaterial and Material World

Descartes defined the immaterial world as being the world of ideas, thoughts, and the spirit. It is composed of an immaterial substance that cannot be experienced by the senses, but which we have access to through reason, or rational thought.

Conversely, the physical world is composed of a material substance, which we experience with our senses. It is unthinking and mechanistic, and is governed by the laws of physics. Our physical bodies consist of a material substance, and without our immaterial minds we would simply be unthinking machines.

Two Worlds

Descartes accepted the prevailing scientific view that all material things are mechanical. However, he believed that the immaterial mind is a uniquely human, God-given attribute, and that its ability to reason enables us to gain knowledge of immaterial things such as God, mathematics, and various physical laws.

THE BODY AS A MACHINE

THE mind/body dualism of Rene Descartes sparked a debate through the 17th and 18th centuries. The question of how two substances (material and immaterial) interact is still debated and researched today. But foremost among those who rejected Descartes’ theory was a British philosopher, Thomas Hobbes.

Physicalism

Hobbes (1588–1679) was a contemporary of Descartes’, and closely corresponded with him about mathematics. However, he differed from Descartes about dualism. He did not accept Descartes’ idea of an immaterial substance, which he considered a contradiction in terms: a substance by its nature must be material. Following that belief, he argued that if there are no immaterial substances then everything must be material – a view that has since become known as physicalism.

Hobbes took a particular interest in the natural sciences and was influenced by the ideas of Galileo. Like many other thinkers of the time, he thought the universe behaves like a machine, and so is subject to physical laws. The movements of the planets and other heavenly bodies are explained by these laws, which apply to all physical objects. If, as Hobbes believed, humans are purely physical, then we too follow the same laws, and are effectively biological machines. Even our minds, Hobbes argued, are physical: our thoughts and intentions are not evidence of some immaterial substance, but the result of physical processes in our brains.

Hobbes’s concept of a purely physical universe was a radical departure from conventional thinking at the time, especially since it denied the existence of an immaterial God. However, it provided a counterargument to rationalism and paved the way for a distinctively British empiricist approach to philosophy.

Mind-Brain Identity

Hobbes did not distinguish between the substances of mind and body: he argued that there is only physical substance, so the mind and the brain are one and the same thing. This means, in effect, that the thoughts and feelings that we experience are physical events in the brain, which are prompted by information provided by our senses. These thoughts and feelings are not made of some form of immaterial substance, but can be understood in terms of physical processes. This idea was reformulated in the 20th century as the mind-brain identity theory.  

Cogs in the machine

For Hobbes, physical laws govern the universe, which is made of many component parts, each of which has its own function, and is governed by physical laws.

The natural world forms one such part of the universe, and within it plants, animals, and humans each play their part. Humans have organised themselves into societies, and these in turn are governed by laws.

Biologically, each human being is a complex machine, composed of numerous functioning parts, all of which are controlled by physical processes within the brain. The brain itself, according to Hobbes, is controlled by internal and external stimuli.

Hobbes’ Theory – In Summary

The body

Our bodies are biological machines and are governed by physical laws. We have physical needs, which prompt “vital” movements, such as the beating of our hearts. However, even our most “voluntary” movements are physically predetermined.

Society

Hobbes believed that humans are selfish and exist only to satisfy their individual physical needs. To avoid chaos, we organise ourselves into societies and submit to the rule of law, which serves as a kind of personal protection agency.

Nature

The universe is purely physical, according to Hobbes, and operates like clockwork according to natural laws of motion. The natural world we live in is a part of that universe, and it and its component parts are similarly machine-like. Everything is predetermined, leaving no room for free will, nor for the mind as anything other than the operation of the brain.

Standard
Arts, History, Philosophy

(Philosophy): Voltaire

THE LIFE OF VOLTAIRE (1694-1778)

VOLTAIRE was the pen name of Francois-Marie Arouet, a prolific writer and philosopher whose vast oeuvre contained multiple literary forms including plays, poetry, novels, essays, historical and scientific works, over 21,000 letters and over 2,000 books and pamphlets. Many of his most popular prose works were in the form of swashbuckling, episodic, courtly romances. These were often written as polemics and contained scathing prefaces explaining the author’s motives.

Voltaire’s best-known work, Candide (1759), was constructed around a sustained and withering attack on the philosophy of Gottfried Leibniz and ironically satirises Leibniz’s particular brand of philosophical and moral optimism. Although regarded in some quarters as holding somewhat cynical views on human nature, Voltaire nonetheless believed that humans could find moral virtue through reason and that reason allied to observation of the natural world was sufficient to determine the existence of God.

Voltaire’s principal philosophical works are contained in his Dictionnaire Philosophique (“Philosophical Dictionary”), published in 1764, which was comprised of articles, essays and pamphlets attacking the French political establishment and in particular the Church. Among the many civil causes Voltaire advocated in his essays were the right to a fair trial, the freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and tolerance of other religions. He also sought to expose and denounce the hypocrisies and injustices he saw as inherent in the ancien régime, the social and political structure of France between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries. The ancien regime, for Voltaire, was predicated on an imbalance of power, loaded firmly in favour of the clergy and noble aristocracy at the expense of the commoners and middle classes who were suppressed by crippling and corrupt systems of taxation. As the Church seemed to be not only complicit in this corruption and injustice but also a principal part of the state apparatus, the clergy naturally bore the brunt of Voltaire’s ire. Deeply opposed to organised religion, Voltaire was highly critical of the Church in Rome, and even held the view that the Bible was an outdated legal and moral reference guide, citing it was the work of man and not the inspired word of God.

There were, however, some curious inconsistencies in the radical positions that Voltaire chose to adopt. Capable of constructing impassioned and erudite arguments for the establishment of a constitutional monarchy in one essay, Voltaire would then reject the tenets of democracy for providing a voice to the ill-informed and ignorant masses in his next essay. Like Plato, Voltaire reviewed the role of the monarch in society from a position of modified absolutism – a system whereby the king or queen rules under the guidance of a group of appointed advisers who have the best concerns of the kingdom and its subjects at heart, for it is in the intertest of the monarch to ensure wealth and stability in society at large.

Voltaire’s oft-quoted assertion that “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him” has led to the misconception that he was an atheist. In fact, despite his opposition to the Church, Voltaire believed in God and built his own private chapel. The quote given is taken from one of Voltaire’s polemical poems, Epistle to the Author of the Book, The Three Imposters, and can be taken to mean that the central question of the existence of God is largely immaterial, as many civilisations have created gods to explain natural phenomena. As a follower of deism, Voltaire rejected the mysticism and strictures of religious teaching, believing that reason and nature provide the basis for spiritual beliefs: “It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason.”

Voltaire is best known for his memorable aphorisms. One of the most oft-cited quotations attributed to Voltaire about freedom of speech – “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” – is, however, totally apocryphal. It was actually written by the English writer Evelyn Beatrice Hall in her 1906 biography of Voltaire, The Friends of Voltaire.

Standard
Arts, History, Philosophy

(Philosophy): Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

1770–1831

GEORG HEGEL was born on 27 August 1770, in Stuttgart, Germany. He studied philosophy and classics at Tübingen, and, after graduation, he became a tutor and explored theology. Hegel taught at Heidelberg and Berlin, where he wrote and explored philosophical and theological concepts.

Hegel was a major figure in German idealism. His historicist and idealist account of reality was revolutionary at the time and a major factor in the development of some radical threads of left-wing political thought. His major work, The Phenomenology of Spirit (or mind), was published in 1807. Many of his ideas were developed in other deeply complex works until his death, from cholera, in 1831.

Almost everything that Hegel was to develop over the rest of his life is prefigured in the Phenomenology. The book and text is far from systematic and is generally accepted as difficult to read. The Phenomenology attempts to present human history, with all its revolutions, wars, and scientific discoveries, as an objective and idealistic self-developing Spirit or Mind.  

Hegel is a notoriously difficult philosopher to understand. For a beginner with next to no grounding in the Greek logic of Aristotle and the later works of Descartes, Hume and Locke it is probably a forlorn task best left until the fundamentals of philosophy are mastered. Being able to comprehend what he writes requires a grasp of at least the basics. Hegel still causes frustration among academics and one of the philosophers that give the discipline its forbidding reputation.

For example, in his book Hegel, Edward Caird writes: “But the height of audacity in serving up pure nonsense, in stringing together senseless and extravagant mazes of words, such as had previously been known only in madhouses, was finally reached in Hegel… and became the instrument of the most bare-faced general mystification that has ever taken place, with a result which will appear fabulous to posterity, and will remain as a monument to German stupidity.”

To have any chance of understanding Hegel one must first come to terms with the principle of the dialectic method. This is a type of argument or discussion between two or more opposing viewpoints whereupon the outcome or truth can be distilled. As the mechanism for this process Hegel proposed variations on the three “classical laws of thought” – that is, the law of identity (essentially “truths” that are taken to be self-evident), and the laws of [non]contradiction and the law of the excluded middle. Paraphrasing these last two suggests respectively that contradictory statements cannot both be true but that either proposition must be true. This is the kind of difficulty that any student of philosophy will be faced with.

Hegelian dialectics is based upon four concepts:

. Everything is transient and finite, existing in the medium of time.

. Everything is composed of contradictions (opposing forces).

. Gradual changes lead to crisis or turning points when one force overcomes its opposing force (quantitative change leads to qualitative change).

. Change is helical (spiral), not circular.

In summary, Hegel believed that when our minds become fully conscious, awakened, or enlightened, we will have a perfect understanding of reality. In short, our thoughts about reality, and reality itself, will be the same. He argues this by showing that the mind goes through an evolution on its way to what he calls “absolute spirit”.

Because Hegel’s philosophy requires a journey it can be seen that it is the process and not just the result that is important. A struggle exists between one viewpoint (or thesis) to which there might exist one or more opposing viewpoints (or antithesis). A process of debate or connected dispute such as revolution or war might lead to a higher level of understanding (or synthesis) to which another antithesis might emerge and thus the process towards truth will continue. This is a Hegelian description of all history as an inevitable progression towards truth. It is complex and a difficult area of study.

Hegel’s mark on history has been profound, in that his influence has spread throughout both left- and right-wing political thought. Marx drew influence from Hegel by developing the idea that history and reality should be viewed dialectically and that the process of change – the struggle – should be seen as a transition from the fragmentary towards the complete. Yet, this is a skewed development of what Hegel tried to suggest in Phenomenology. However, in practical terms it is likely that Hegel may have approved of Marx’s revolutionary interpretation, as he was witness at close hand to revolutionary Europe towards the end of the eighteenth century.

. Hegel on Reason and Experience

“Truth in philosophy means that concept and external reality correspond.

Genuine tragedies in the world are not conflicts between right and wrong. They are conflicts between two rights.”

Standard