Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

UNIT 1b SOUL, MIND AND BODY - Coggle Diagram

- - - - E.G Plato
      - There is a body and a soul, and these are separate entities. The body is physical
        -The mind/ soul/ consciousness is non-physical/ immaterial.
        -The soul/mind/consciousness lives on after the body/ has the potential to.
        
        SUBSTANCE DUALISM
        
        -We are made up of two seperate substances- body and soul. These substances are not identical and have different properties.
        -The mind thinks and the body functions.
        -Soul and body interact.
        -The soul lives on when you die because it is a seperate entity to the body.
        
        PROPERTY DUALISM
        
        -We are made up of one substance but it has different properties.
    - - E.G Aristotle.
      - We are one being, body and mind/ soul are one, they are identical
        -A non-physical mind/ soul and a physical body that work as one. If one dies, the other dies.
        
        REDUCTIVE/ HARD MATERIALISM
        
        -All we are made from is physical matter and our soul is just the physical activity of brain cells.
        Everything can be reduced to physical states.
        There is nothing that survives death.
        All thinking is physical- there is not a non-physical part of us.
- - - - -Platos philosophy often deals with opposites. E.g forms and particulars, knowledge and opinion, philosopher and non-philosopher.
        -The idea of dual aspect is important here:
        SOUL= unchanging, eternal, non-physical, knowledge, simple.
        BODY= changing, temporal, physical, opinion, parts.
    - - THE LINGUISTIC ARGUMENT
        
        -We use language regarding ourselves which suggests a distinction. 'i' 'me' refers to an inner, separate reality to the body. This is evidence of the soul.
      - THE KNOWLEDGE ARGUMENT
        
        Somehow within the world of flux and change we can grasp these universals which are not affected by time and space, so there must be something within us that is equally unaffected by flux and change that has the ability to intuit concepts.
      - THE CYCLE OF OPPOSITES
        
        -We can know things by their opposites. Death comes from life, so life comes from death. This suggests perpetual recycling of human souls back into the realm of the living to the realm of the dead and back (ROF to ROA).
      - ARGUMENT FROM RECOLLECTION
        
        Because we know universal truths such as 2+2=4, we must have seen them before. Our souls learnt this knowledge in the previous life.
        E.g MENO.
  - - - PHYSICAL= Physical desires like food, sex etc.
      - EMOTIONAL= feelings
      - RATIONAL= wants to know true knowledge
    - - RATIONAL= Charioteer. EMOTIONAL= white horse. PHYSICAL= Black horse. The horses should be controlled by the charioteer, representing how the rational element should be in charge.
- - - - The soul is not a separate substance to the body. The shape stamped into the wax is inseperable from the wax- otherwise it would not be a wax stamp and it would not work. The two things give it it's characteristics.
    - - If the body was an axe, the soul would be it's ability to chop.
    - - If the body were an eye, the soul would be it's ability to see.
  - - - Nutritive soul, appetitive soul
    - - Nutritive soul, appetitive soul, rational soul- higher degree soul.
    - - Nutritive soul
- - - - -Substance dualist- non physical mind and physical body. Rationalist
        Mind and body are separate and can exist independantly of each other.
        We are a 'thinking thing'- our mind is our true identity.
        We can be certain that we have a mind as we are thinking things, but cannot be sure of the existence of our bodies because our senses deceive us (rationalism)
      - 'COGITO ERGO SUM' I THINK THEREFORE I AM
        
        I must have a mind and be a thinking thing as I can think about my own thinking- this proves I can think.
- - - - -Talking of a non-physical mind and physical body is a mistake in the way we use language.
        -Descartes is wrong to apply categories such as the 'physical part' and the 'non-physical' part.
        -We should just see us as one whole conscious being and not divide our existence as this sort of language leads to a catergory mistake.
        
        CATEGORY MISTAKE EXAMPLE- Someone is shown around a university campus and is shown all the amenities- library, lecture theatres, sports pitches etc and then asks 'where is the university?' The person assumed there was something more to the university and has made a category mistake.
        DUALISTS ARE SIMILAR AS THEY BELIEVE THE SOUL IS SOMETHING EXTRA TO THE BODY.
    - - -Descartes and the dualist way of understanding the soul or mind is the same as talking about a ghost that operates a machine. Ryle states that it is foolish to believe in a non-physical part of ourselves which controls the physical body- this is like looking for a ghost within a machine that operates it.
    - - When we talk of ourselves we do not talk of ourselves as separate parts- 'my hand is turning on the kettle' or 'my mind has decide to make a cup of tea'. (CRITICISM OF PLATO'S LINGUISTIC ARGUMENT).
        We dont talk of ourselves in a seperate way if we have a non-physical part of us that makes us do something physically. Ryle says we talk of ourselves as a whole.
        We are not separate substances according to ryle but one whole person that cannot be divided or seen in the categories of physical and non-physical- In effect, all the components of our body make us a whole individual and is our identity.
- - - - -Neuroscience- eventually we will be able to identify all mental processes and have a complete explanation of consciousness.
        -Problem of interaction- Dualists cannot point out where the physical body and non physical mind interact. MATERIALISM solves the mind body problem.
        OCKHAM'S RAZOR- says that you should not "multiply entities beyond necessity'- simpler is better. Materialism is easier to defend and explain than dualism.
    - - -QUALIA- The actual feel of our conscious experiences. No matter how much knowledge we gain of brains, there will always be a feeling that there is more to thoughts than just physical brain processes.
        
        There is much we don't yet know about the brain, therefore in a sense dualism and materialism is are just as convincing as each other because there is no evidence to properly prove either theory is correct.
        -Concluding an argument based upon what is simplest can be seen as a cop-out- not everything is simply explained and you cannot use ockhams razor to justify something that is not empircally proved and say it is better just because it is simpler.
  - - - The traditional idea of the principle of life- anima- a seperate thing that contains our personality and our real identity. REJECTED BY DAWKINS
    - - Defined by our Oxford English dictionary as 'intellectual or spiritual power. High development of mental faculties'. We need to be clear that this is not a separate thing from the brain.
    - - -PETER ATKINS would support Dawkins with the idea that science will reach a singularity- everything can be fully explained by science.
        -Exposes the lack of empirical evidence for the non-physical part. It makes sense to use the word soul metaphorically to describe how intelligent our brains are.
        -Can be compared to Ryles monist views SOUL 1= Category error .
        -SOUL 2 is like the idea of qualia.
    - - -Disregards religious or spiritual views. Also uses the OCFD ENG DICTIONARY rather than the PHILOSOPHICAL ENCYCLOPAEDIA to define SOUL 2. This means it lacks accuracy but it also could be argued that Dawkins has extracted this information to support his argument.
        -He cannot fathom that anything non-physical or inexplicable by science could exist- rationalists would disagree with his outlook.
        -He has not provided adequate grounds to dismiss soul 1 because there is no exact evidence either way, ALL IS JUST THEORY.
  - - - -Passed down from generation to generation like DNA, Information is copied and passed down one generation to the next.
        -THE IDEA OF A SOUL IS A MEME
        -
    - - -She used to believe that we had a soul and was a dualist however her views changed so she must have thoroughly researched this for her views to change.
        -She uses science to gather her results and has done lots of experimenting to base her results upon.
    - - -Relying of science is limiting for all beliefs and disregards the idea of there being something more.
- - - - Supports platonic and dualist views of the soul. We think of our body as seperate from the soul.
        How can we expect to find evidence for a non-physical, spiritual thing?
    - - -scientific evidence does suggest that mental activity is based in the brain
        -A lot of evidence suggests the mind is the same as the brain
        -Evidence for the soul is largely disputed by modern scientists.
  - - - -Ward's argument seems based upon the worry that without belief in a soul, moral chaos would unfold. However, it is not feasible to base an argument upon what might happen rather than actual evidence. Ward does not provide any evidence but instead suggests that the soul has to be believed in. This is not true. Humans, regardless of belief in the soul or not, are still able to treat other humans with respect, because they see them as a whole being with emotions- RYLE'S BELIEFS highlight how we should view ourselves and each other as one whole being with consciousness. Just because one may not belief they have a sacred part of themselves as a soul in a religious sense, does not mean they are unworthy of respect. Also, Wards point about 'believing in a soul is essential to treating something ethically' does not work because the idea of animal welfare is not based upon the belief that animals have a soul, but that they are living beings. RYLE'S view seems more feasible than dualism and materialism since there is no evidence for or against that solidifies the soul exactly, but viewing beings as one whole conscious thing still preserves a humans life principle effectively.
    - - -We are not just physical things, there is more to us than what we see. We have personalities that make up these differences.
        -Other philosophers such as Descartes would agree with Ward that we all have two parts to us..