Descartes' Mind-Body Paradigm: Separate Entities - Essay Sample

Introduction

Rene Descartes' Knowledge of Body & Mind paradigm argues that the nature of the body and mind exist separately. The quality of the mind that includes thinking and the non-extended things differ entirely from that of the body, which provides for extended and non-thinking things (Hatfield, 2014). According to Descartes, all acquired knowledge and wisdom arises from the mind - that is, no intellectual information or knowledge has prior existence in the senses (Hatfield, 2014). This argument concurs with that of the orthodox scholastic Aristotelians that argues for a thought to exist, there has to be an image or illusion. Descartes illustrates these notions from childhood prejudice. He argues a child is led naturally by instincts to seek benefit but also avoid pain or body harm. For instance, when a child grows to be an adult, they are immersed in both the sense and body, thus making the mind the basis for learning about nature and reality. The illusions and images gathered overtime are what determines the existence of anything with extended characteristics, including the body.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The mind can perceive certain things to exist even when the eyes cannot see them. Similarly, the mind can perceive certain things to exist even when they do not exist. A good example is a hallucination. When a person is considered to be hallucinating, they either see non-existing things or ignore existing things. The body does not play any role in either creating these existing or non-existing things, which means that it is neither non-thinking and but only extends what the mind is thinking. On the same not, Descartes also believes that it is equally not possible to doubt his existence - that is, the body does exist and cannot be ignored. From this argument, it can be argued that while the mind and body exist as two separate entities with varying characteristics, they affect each other. However, for the body, much of the effect is interpreted in mind and not the body. For example, for one to move part of a body such as a limb or an arm, the mind thinks that actions and "commands" the body to respond.

On the other hand, if one gets an injury on the part of a body - for instance, a burn - the mind that interprets act and presents it as pain (thought) and not as a wound. It is not clear to us if the body on the burn on the body exists as pain or whether it the mind that has "created that pain. One can argue that there remains a paradox in what truly exists; it is ironic; however, to doubt the existence of the mind because it has perceived the pain.

Nonetheless, Descartes attempts to decipher this paradox by arguing that (1) one has a clear distinction of the nature of mind as thinking non-extended thing yet; (2) the body exists as an extended, yet a non-thinking thing. Lastly, (3) the clear distinction between the two means that the mind can exist without the body (Skirry). The mind is where the entire actions take place, and this characteristic of the mind makes it challenging to doubt the existence of the mind.

Malebranche's Occasionalism

Numerous Philosophers have long wondered about the nature of causality, and what are the occasional and true causes of the work in the world. In the current world, both science and technology have long attempted to explain why things are the way they are and what causes them to be that way. For instance, Darwinism theory is a reasonably modern scientific example that attempts to explain how human beings came into existence and what caused it, on the one hand. On another, the Bible denotes that the cause of human existence is God. From Malebranche's perspective, Darwinism cause of human existence is natural causality, while that of the Bible is a true causality.

Father Nicholas Malebranche's occasionalism paradigm denotes that God is the sole genuine and true cause, while the other perceived reasons for cause are not real but at most occasional causes (Lee, 2008). if, for instance, my finger touched a hot surface and burned, neither the hot surface nor the act of burning reaches the mind to tell it that I have burned my finger, but rather God directly installs a sensation of the burn to my mind on touching the hot surface. Similarly, on retracting my hand from the surface, my incorporeal will does not case the retraction act. Still, God directly intercedes again and sends a sensation to my brain to produce the retraction movement on my incorporeal will.

The true and occasional causes from a mind-body perspective are God (true cause), and the mind (occasional case). All our decision and actions, including that of the mind, soul, and the physical body, are caused by God. That God is the true cause of the body motion, and the metal process and decision is the apparent (occasional cause). The relationship between the natural, occasional, and true causes, Malebranche argues it complex and cannot be understood by the human mind.

He argues, there is only one genuine and true cause God; all nature and power, which form the natural causes, are the will of God, and all these natural causes are not the true cause but apparently occasional causes. As a result, we need to appeal to the one true cause because he is the root cause of all things, including our existence, sense, perceptions, motion, and even experiences of physical pain and pleasures. God controls the world through a fixed and small set of rules, and he rarely violates them by performing miracles.

There are several causes, according to Malebranche - natural, occasional, and true causes. Natural causes are the causes resulting from passive things -such as the mind. The sole true cause, as mentioned, is God, while the occasional cause is those that are influenced by the natural cause- such as making a decision.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the occasionalism paradigm denotes that God is the sole unique, genuine, and true cause. In contrast, the other perceived reasons for cause are not real but at most occasional causes. There is only one genuine and true cause God; all nature and power, which form the natural causes, are the will of God, and all these natural causes are not the true cause but apparently occasional causes. It is, therefore, important to conform to the true cause because he controls everything both the natural and occasional causes.

References

Hatfield, G. (2014). Rene Descartes. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes/

Lee, S. (2008, Oct 20). Occasionalism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/occasionalism/

Skirry, J. (n.d.). Rene Descartes: The Mind-Body Distinction. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://www.iep.utm.edu/descmind/