substance dualism

Question 1

what are the arguments for substance dualism

Answer 1

conceivability and divisibility

Question 2

what are the arguments agains substance dualism

Answer 2

interaction problems and problem of other minds

Question 3

substance dualism definition

Answer 3

the claim that there are two substances, mind and matter, that are ontologically distinct

Question 4

what is Descartes conceivability argument

Answer 4

• 1. I have a clear and distinct idea of my mind as a thinking thing that is not extended in space
  2. I have a clear and distinct idea of my body as a non-thinking thing that is extended in space
  3. Anything I can conceive of clearly and distinctly is something that God could create
  4. So, God could create my mind as a thinking thing that is not extended in space and my body as a non-thinking thing that is extended in space
  5. So, it is possible for mind and body to exist independently of each other
  6. So, mind and body are two separate substances

Question 5

what are two responses to Descartes conceivability argument

Answer 5

• mind without a body is inconceivable
• what is conceivable may not be physically possible

Question 6

explain the response to Descartes conceivability argument that mind without body is inconceivable

Answer 6

• Behaviourism would argue that mind without body is inconceivable
• To have mental states is to have behavioural dispositions
• To have behavioural dispositions is to be disposed to move your body in certain ways
• It is inconceivable to be disposed to move your body in certain ways if you do not have a body
• So, it is inconceivable to have mental states if you do not have a body
• So, mind without body is inconceivable

Question 6

explain the response to Descartes conceivability argument that What is conceivable may not be physically possible

Answer 6

• Just because we can imagine the mind floating around independantly of the body doesnt mean it is actually physically possible.
• Just because something is logically possible doesnt mean it is also physically
• Just because we can imagine a mind independant of the body doesnt mean it exists especially if we have no empirical proof of such a mind existing

Question 7

explain descartes divisibility argument

Answer 7

1. My body is divisible
2. My mind is not divisible
3. Therefore, my mind and body are separate things and are ontologically distinct

Question 8

what does ontologically distinct mean

Answer 8

when a substance doesn’t depend on anything else for its existence

Question 9

what are two responses to Descartes divisibility argument

Answer 9

• the mind actually is divisible
• not everything that is physical is divisible

Question 10

explain the response to Descartes divisibility argument that the mind actually is divisible

Answer 10

• cases of mental illness, multiple personality disorder, brain damage, the person with a rod through his head
• epilepsy treatment literally cuts the brain in half by cutting the connection between the two hemispheres
• this would make the second premise of Descartes argument to be false —> the mind is divisible

Question 11

explain the response to Descartes divisibility argument that not everything that is physical is divisible

Answer 11

• Even if the mind is indivisible, this does not mean that it is a separate kind of substance, it could be just a different indivisible type of physical substance
• The body can be divided but there comes a time when you cannot divide it any further
• So, if physical matter can become indivisible then not everything that is indivisible is non-physical
• So, even if Descartes shows that the mind is indivisible then that does not prove that the mind is non-physical

Question 12

explain the argument against substance dualism –> the problem of other minds

Answer 12

• each person has their own individual thoughts and feelings and emotions which cannot be felt by another person as they are private
• you can infer from other peoples behaviour that they have mind that causes these actions but this can be doubted
• according to substance dualism mind and body are two separate substances but how do we know that there is also a mind attached to a body
• It’s completely possible, on the dualist view, to have physical behaviourwithout a physical mind. In such a case, what evidence could you possibly find which proves other minds exist at all? It seems substance dualism leads to scepticism about the existence of other people’s minds

Question 13

what are the two responses to the argument against substance dualism about the problem of other minds

Answer 13

• mills argument from analogy
• other minds are the best possible explanation

Question 14

explain the response to the argument against substance dualism about the problem of other minds that other minds are the best possible explanation

Answer 14

• we should believe in the existence of other minds anyways in order to avoid scepticism and because through an abductive argument it is the best possible explanation
• example —> if someone spends a few minutes before making a move in chess then the best possible explanation is that they have a mind and were using it to think through their move before making it

Question 15

explain the response to the argument against substance dualism about the problem of other minds about mills argument from analogy

Answer 15

• I have a mind
• My mind causes my behaviour
• Other people have bodies and behave similarly to me in similar situations
• By analogy, their behaviour has the same type of cause as my behaviour: a mind
• Therefore, other people have minds
• However, this doesn’t stand in all cases —> like seeing a three legged dog and saying “that dog has three legs, therefore all dogs have three legs”

Question 16

what is causal interaction and how is it a problem for substance dualism
- hunger example

Answer 16

another issue for substance dualism is how mental things interact causally with physical things when they are supposed to be completely separate substances

Our mental and physical states have to be linked

Example —> when you are hungry (a mental state) this causes you to move your body and eat (a physical state). But if the mental state is non-physical then how does it transfer into the physical world and cause things to happen

Question 17

what are the two interaction problems

Answer 17

• the conceptual integration problem
• the empirical interaction problem

Question 18

what is the conceptual interaction problem

Answer 18

• 1) Physical things only move if they are interacted with

2) Only something that is physical and can touch the thing that is moved can exert such a force

3) The mind is not physical so it can’t touch the body (if the mind is physical then substance dualism is wrong)

4) Therefore the mind cannot move the body

Question 19

what is the empirical interaction problem

Answer 19

1) The law of conservation of energy says that energy cannot be created or destroyed —> only transferred

2) Our universe is a closed system

3) If substance dualism is true then that would mean that energy is constantly being added into the closed system each time the mental interacts with the physical

4) So, if substance dualism is true, the the law of c of e is false

5) There is lots of empirical evidence for the law

6) So substance dualism must be wrong

Question 20

how would Descartes respond to the problems of interaction

Answer 20

• the mind only interacts with the pineal gland in the brain
• HOWEVER the brain is still a physical thing so the response does not stand against the conceptual interaction problem