ipl-logo

Descartes Sixth Meditation Analysis

1919 Words8 Pages

In the sixth meditation, Descartes postulates that there exists a fundamental difference in the natures of both mind and body which necessitates that they be considered as separate and distinct entities, rather than one stemming from the other or vice versa. This essay will endeavour to provide a critical objection to Descartes’ conception of the nature of mind and body and will then further commit to elucidating a suitably Cartesian-esque response to the same objection. (Descartes,1641) In the sixth meditation Descartes approaches this point of dualism between mind and matter, which would become a famous axiom in his body of philosophical work, in numerous ways. To wit Descartes postulates that he has clear and distinct perceptions of both …show more content…

My perception of my body and matter in general is that it is in its essence divisible (Descartes,1641) This essay here will insert a reference to ‘Leibnitz’s Law’ or otherwise the relatively intuitive principle that for two things to be the same thing, they must share all the qualities of each other. Descartes does not specifically do so, but it is heavily inferred from his argument. Descartes now concludes that since minds are indivisible and bodies are, that according to the Leibnitz’s law they cannot be the same thing and hence: Conclusion: The mind is substantively different from the body and indeed matter in general. Because in this conception the mind is substantively distinct from the body it becomes plausible for us to doubt the intuitive connection between mind and body. Indeed there are many aspects of the external world that do not appear to have minds and yet appear none the less real in spite of this for example mountains, sticks or lamps, given this we can begin to rationalize that perhaps minds can exist without bodies, and we only lack the capacity to perceive them. This essay will now begin the task of laying out the objection to Descartes’ …show more content…

Without a tangible “thing” to split, it could be argued that divisibility has no real meaning at all in relation to things that by their nature cannot be split. To wit, Descartes’ argument supposes that a mind divided would result in absurdity, such as two fractions of a greater mind, both with capacity to think, or in other words, two new minds, he takes this as evidence that a mind cannot be divided; but it would seem plausible also to say that this absurdity is the result of applying terms that only have meaning when applied to things with extension. In other words; a mind may well be capable of division, even if it was substantively different and separate from matter and body, thus we may conclude that Descartes cannot prove the distinction between mind and matter by ascribing notions of relative divisibility or non-divisibility to them. Additionally much of Descartes thought regarding the indivisibility of the mind is based on a preceding conception of the mind as non-physical before the argument proves

Show More
Related
213 Words | 1 Pages

CHIDIEBUBE OPARA PHIL 1301 PROF BROWN July 10, 2017 PRINCESS ELISABETH First, in my essay about what Princess Elisabeth was asking Descartes to clarify was about the meditation. This meditation was to give an expression of how the mind and the body interact to one another. Next, In Descartes response to Princess Elisabeth, he claims that the mind and the body are the two different important substances in our human beings.

Read More
343 Words | 2 Pages

In his piece Meditation III, Rene Descartes makes the argument that he could be the origin of his ideas of physical objects. From there, the first thing we must consider is where our thoughts come from. There are three types of ideas: Those that originate from outside himself, those that are created by himself and his own mind, and those that he is born with. The ideas that he is born with are called innate ideas.

Read More
1654 Words | 7 Pages

However, Descartes is indeed certain of the fact that he is a thinking being, and that he exists. As a result of this argument, Descartes makes a conclusion that the things he perceives clearly and distinctly cannot be false, and are therefore true (Blanchette). This clear and distinct perception is an important component to the argument that Descartes makes in his fifth meditation for the existence of God. This paper explains Descartes ' proof of God 's existence from Descartes ' fifth meditation, Pierre Gassendi 's objection to this proof, and then offers the paper 's author 's opinion on both the proof and objection.

Read More
394 Words | 2 Pages

Summarize Descartes’s view of the mind-body relationship Descartes researched the brain and

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

In this paper, I will deliver a reconstruction of Descartes’ Cogito Argument and my reasoning to validate it as indubitable. I will do so by justifying my interpretations through valid arguments and claim, by showcasing examples with reasoning. Rene Descartes is a French Philosopher of the 17th century, who formulated the philosophical Cogito argument by the name of ‘cogito ergo sum,’ also known as “I think, therefore, I am.” Rene was a skeptic philosopher amongst many scholastic philosophers of his time. To interpret his cogito argument as indubitable and whether it could serve as a foundational belief, he took a skeptical approach towards the relations between thoughts and existence.

Read More
328 Words | 2 Pages

Descartes uses the argument known as the conceivably argument to support his thoughts on substance dualism. With this argument, Descartes explains how the body can be divided into different particles and entities but the mind can not. Since the mind is unable to match the division that the body can be divided into, the mind and the body are two separate things. If the mind and the body are two different things, then the body and the mind can exist without each other. An issue with this argument, most likely stemmed from the lack of knowledge and technology Descartes possessed in that time period, is that the mind is connected to the body.

Read More
416 Words | 2 Pages

In the ‘Mediation of First Philosophy’, Descartes talks about the foundations of beliefs and knowledge, in which he essentially aims to overturn the basic foundations of knowledge and beliefs, due to previous falsehoods, which had been centred on all scientific and mathematical foundations. Descartes is attempting to go straight for the basic principles on which his former beliefs rested. Descartes first step in undermining his basic principles is to demolish the idea the perception of our senses. In order for Descartes to accomplish such a tedious task, lays out possible arguments to support the idea for which can undermine our senses. He develops an argument called the ‘dreaming argument’, in which he explains that “There are never any sure signs by means of which being awake can be distinguished from being asleep” (13).

Read More
962 Words | 4 Pages

In Second Meditation, Descartes claims, after radical doubt, that the only undeniable truth is his own existence because he must exist to think about his existence. His argument is compelling, but for one problem. In this paper, I shall argue that Descartes’ argument that his “thinking” (Descartes, 153) is proof of his existence is flawed because he establishes no premise to claim ownership of this thinking. I will also claim that even if Descartes is creating his own thoughts, albeit a lack of appropriate proof, his argument still does not prove a causal relationship between thinking and existing. In passage B, Descartes examines the properties of a piece of wax to confirm his existence.

Read More
750 Words | 3 Pages

Is it real or not… In this paper I will be writing about my initial glance of Descartes Meditations. As I was reading the first meditation I came to the realization of that the willingness of Desecrates not to rely on his five senses is setting him up for failure. So therefore my first question is can you always trust your senses?

Read More
210 Words | 1 Pages

Therefore, he was the first to conceive the mind–body problem in the form in which it exists today. The central affirmation of what is regularly called Cartesian dualism, in recognition of Descartes, is that the spiritual mind and the material body, while being rationally distinct substances, causally interact. This is an idea that remains to emphasize highly in various non-European philosophies. Mental events create physical events and vice versa. In contrast to dualism, monism does not endure any significant divisions.

Read More
1100 Words | 5 Pages

Descartes argues to be able to think of countless other shapes that have not been encountered by the sensory perception (e.g. a chiliagon), and yet “[he] can demonstrate various properties of these shapes, just as [he] can of a triangle” (¶6). Nevertheless, Descartes claims that all the properties of these shapes are true for the fact that he is clearly aware of them. Thus it follows from the fact that these shapes are true that these must be something, “and not merely nothing” (¶6). Furthermore, Descartes thinks that we are capable of having an idea of true and immutable nature when we are in the presence of something that is quite clear and it does not depend on something existing. If it is the case that it is clear, then this idea must be true and, at the same time, it must be

Read More
529 Words | 3 Pages

For an example a thing is an object like a lamp it’s just an object it doesn’t have a mind or can think. A human though as Descartes describes has a mind that allows us to be aware and awake and this is what separates us from objects because we are able to think for

Read More
1104 Words | 5 Pages

In his philosophical thesis, of the ‘Mind-Body dualism’ Rene Descartes argues that the mind and the body are really distinct, one of the most deepest and long lasting legacies. Perhaps the strongest argument that Descartes gives for his claim is that the non extended thinking thing like the Mind cannot exist without the extended non thinking thing like the Body. Since they both are substances, and are completely different from each other. This paper will present his thesis in detail and also how his claim is critiqued by two of his successors concluding with a personal stand.

Read More
1965 Words | 8 Pages

It allows us to conceptualize the mind as an incorporeal tool that the body uses to function uniquely within its environment. We can see how the weight of an object is determined by the density, gravitational field in which it’s in and many other corporeal aspects of the object itself, while also admitting that the weight of something is not something we can hold or touch or ascribe a sense of extension to. It makes for an adequate parallel for the mind and body if the mind was as simply related to the body as the weight of an object is to the nature of the object itself. This explanation, however, admits that the body more likely manifests the mind rather than is created with union to the mind. It also begs the question that if the qualities of the body help describe the qualities of the mind then how truly distinct is the mind from the body, besides in terms of states of

Read More
1744 Words | 7 Pages

But may believe even Descartes isn’t exactly clear on the inner working of the relationship (Robinson, Howard). Spinoza’s substance monism cleverly dissolves this issue by labeling mind (thought) and body (extension) as attributes to a common and singular substance. Other substance pluralist philosophies are also denied when we truly capture the infinite extent of

Read More

More about Descartes Sixth Meditation Analysis

Open Document