Leibniz, Descartes, substance dualism, metaphysical concept, modern neuroscience, biophysical architecture, immaterial substance, philosophical coherence, indubitability, identity, thought, consciousness, self
Descartes' Argument of Indubitability originates from his methodological doubt, which entails thorough questioning and doubt of that which can be doubted, such as the existence of an outside world, his body, and all information that his senses provide. On the other hand, when Descartes acknowledges the role of doubt, he is convinced that he exists as a thinking entity, and the famous phrase "Cogito ergo sum" translates to "I think. Therefore, I am" (Garber, 1983). This undeniable existence of the thinking self is a firm foundation from which Descartes builds his deterrents. He develops this contrast by proposing a radical premise where he asserts that the essence of mind or consciousness is the nature of thought while the material reality is what we know as extended matter. Furthermore, the idea and magnitude are portrayed as two mutually exclusive items. From this difference of nature, Descartes concludes that the thinking subject of the self and consciousness is not susceptible to any physical or extended properties and, therefore, must be an immaterial, indivisible, and non-extended thinking substance - the mind or soul (Gaudemard, 2021).
[...] In trying to show radical differences between mental and physical attributes, Descartes tacitly argues for particular cases of the Indiscernibility of identities. According to Garber (1983), substance dualism Descartes is a philosophy, a metaphysical theory that allows the existence of simple distinct properties and postulates that two different kinds of substances must coexist. Whether one considers the move a complete success is a matter of opinion. Still, Descartes did highlight the problem when, superficially, mind and body seem identical in their contrary properties. [...]
[...] (1997). On a Particular Meaning of the Principle of Duality: Leibniz, Boole, Peano. LER. Tweyman, S. (2022). Descartes' meditations: New approaches-introduction. The European Legacy, 27(3-4), 219-226. [...]
[...] Even though Descartes endeavored to construct a consistent philosophical system, the dualist model is confronted with severe conceptual problems, such as the body-mind interaction issue. Besides, even if his doubt method of radical doubt has a philosophical value as a technique to analyze beliefs rigorously, it does not necessitate the acceptance of his ontological results concerning mind and matter. References Garber, D. (1983). Mind, body, and the laws of nature in Descartes and Leibniz. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 8(1), 105-133. Gaudemard, L. (2021). Rethinking Descartes's Substance Dualism (Vol. 29). Springer. Malatesta, M. [...]
[...] Descartes recognized substance dualism as a distinct proposition for mind and body. In a nutshell, the mind stands for thought and awareness, and the body stands for having a spatial existence. Descartes' reasoning concludes that thinking/consciousness and extension are two distinct properties. Consequently, it is logically inferred from Leibniz's Law that the mind (the thinking substance) and the body (the extended substance) cannot be identical. If the two bodies were similar, they would have to share all traits, and the philosopher would not accept that. [...]
[...] Furthermore, Descartes based his argument on the unproven premise that thought and physical extension (extensionality of material substance) are sole and irreconcilable entities. However, although identifiable neuroscience shows us our mental states, including psychic experiences, it corresponds directly to observable physical brain states and processes. Concurrently with the change of the processes in the brain, the mind joins with its contents, implying that the body and mind are not independent but interconnected (Garber, 1983). Surprisingly, thought and extension are no different from each other - just different levels or forms of the broader reality of the physical world. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
