Descartes Debate On Dualism - 944 Words

Descartes’ debate for dualism is called the divisibility argument, where he believes the mind cannot be divided while the body can and, as a result, the mind and body are distinct. But is this really true? I have evaluated Descartes’ reasons for believing in the divisibility of the body and the indivisibility of the mind from Descartes Meditations. I argue that Descartes argument does not work as he is trying to make science and church compatible and the existence of instances where the mind can be divided. The argument is introduced in Descartes’ sixth meditation when he states, â€Å"I am unable to distinguish any parts within myself.† (59) In this statement the philosopher proposes his belief of the incapability of the mind being divided.†¦show more content†¦Another way of addressing the body as divisible, is the visible fact that the body can be physically divided every time. As a result, Descartes believes the mind cannot extend like the bo dy. Descartes uses a result that was made in the second meditation, â€Å"But what kind of a thing? As I have just said – a thinking thing,† (18) to make the claim in the sixth meditation, â€Å"For when I consider the mind, or myself in so far as I am merely a thinking thing†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (59) and as a result the mind, according to Descartes, is not identical with the body. Conscious, is another basis for Descartes’ argument. Consciousness is presented in the second meditation where Descartes states the mind is a thinking thing. He can conclude that the mind has a conscience while the physical body doesn’t have a conscience so again, the mind and body are not identical. After reviewing Descartes’ divisibility argument, I found instances where I would disagree in Descartes’ statements. Descartes thinks the mind remains active when the body decays from a dead body since the mind is separate from the body because of its indivisibility. By Des cartes stating this, he is saying the mind cannot be known by science while the body can. Since the mind can’t, this provides a place for freewill, faith, and possibly survival of the dead body. As a result, making science and religion compatible. During this time the church is siding with the philosopher, Aristotle, because his philosophies