Dualism in Descartes and Classical Philosophy
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 січ 2019
- Renes Descartes promoted what is known as substance dualism and created the mind-body problem in modern philosophy. This differs from the dualism of earlier thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle, and Thomas Aquinas.
Thank you. The description you provided was clear to hear and understand, also the visuals were great. Wonderful job!
it would be great if you add the references that way people know were to find the original documents/writings/ books
If you still wanna read..
You can go for this one..
PHILOSOPHY OF
MIND
Classical and
Contemporary Readings
David J. Chalmers
New York Oxford
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
2002
Don't know if you are still looking for an answer on this, but I think most of what Cooper discusses here can be found in Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy.
Your explanations are very clear and easy to understand. Thank you
AMAZING description. Just a tip for future reference, make a clear distinction between the two or three arguments at the end of the video. Thanks!
An outstanding exposition! Well done
"Let us now turn to what I have been calling 'mysterian theories'. Rather than coming down on one side or the other of a paradox, such theories take it to reveal the ineradicable strangeness of the phenomenon at issue. But the uncomfortable truth is that paradoxes are blameworthy confusions in *us* , not bizarre features of the world; and so, instead of marvelling at them and catering to them, we ought to understand where we have gone astray."
-Paul Horwich
"Wittgenstein's Metaphilosophy" c 2012 Oxford University Press, pg 47
i wish i could talk with Decartes nowadays.
I really appreciate the video Doctor, Thank you!!!
Your work is great, thankyou
The idea of nature as "machine" was common in the early modern period and was important in the development of science. It took the place of the Aristotelian goal of understanding the "essence" of things in nature. The uncovering of the laws of this natural machine with the language of mathematics was to study the mind of God. But, as Dr. Cooper points out, it came at the expense of losing the teleological understand of nature. Seems we can have it both ways.
Love the video man keep it up,very interesting.
I haven’t read enough on descartes’s philosophy and how it differs from aquinas’s and other more classical (Christian) views. However, I think the argument “everything in nature was made by God for a purpose and has an end in mind,” is very similar to the definition of a machine. In fact, I feel like the instinctual, automatic, and soulless state of nature and it’s perfection are all exemplary of a machine. A machine is built for a purpose. Nature is perfect in the ways it interacts. our reason makes us imperfect and our mission is to be reunited with God in a perfect state again. Like nature. Again, I haven’t read enough so I don’t know the nuances, but based on your explanation I don’t see how the two philosophies differ greatly. in fact, I could see them coinciding and complementing each other. Nature is a machine built for the purpose of (1) showing man an example of perfection in his world to connect him to his Creator. (2) provide a world for God’s greatest creations to live on/survive and thrive.
Ever heard anyone say "if there was a god there wouldn't be so much evil and pain on earth?" Well what if god made earth as a simulation so we could experience pain and hardship to learn but our soul doesnt get harmed as when we die our spirit goes home back to eternal bliss. Some people who have had a near death experience say they see a dark tunnel with a bright light at the end, that sounds like birth to me like there life flashed backwards b4 their eyes and thats the last memory. Reincarnation back in2 the simulation because u went out (died) before u finished what u came here 2 do THATS MY THEORY it explains the laws of the universe and the paranormal in some retrospect. Law of attraction and the Mandela effect etc....
Nature is not perfect
@@realeyesrealiserealliesful2957 why put us thru all that pain when good could just give us the knowledge ?
@@kimmminemwest8850 Descartes actually surfaces this in his essay
Great explanation of the Cartesian Dualism. Thank you! Can you recommend a book about this topic?
Have you found it?
You can go for this one
👉 PHILOSOPHY OF
MIND
Classical and
Contemporary Readings
David J. Chalmers
New York Oxford
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
2002
Hello
he talks about the animals at 3:30
you Are A Freaking Legend Sir
Dude was strange but fascinating
Triple O is the best solution to substance dualism, mind-body problem. Read Graham Harman and jump for joy.
Ever heard anyone say "if there was a god there wouldn't be so much evil and pain on earth?" Well what if god made earth as a simulation so we could experience pain and hardship to learn but our soul doesnt get harmed as when we die our spirit goes home back to eternal bliss. Some people who have had a near death experience say they see a dark tunnel with a bright light at the end, that sounds like birth to me like there life flashed backwards b4 their eyes and thats the last memory. Reincarnation back in2 the simulation because u went out (died) before u finished what u came here 2 do THATS MY THEORY it explains the laws of the universe and the paranormal in some retrospect. Law of attraction and the Mandela effect etc....
How would you explain hell then? If god only created the physical world as a simulation, why would he set up temptation to affect the purity of our soul, and eventually disqualified from heaven?
@@johnluo2865 Why does there have to be a Hell? It's not requisite to the existence of God, or some creative entity we would call God. Just saying, if you argue against one religion's specific interpretation you're setting up a strawman, and anyone who doesn't accept that orthodoxy is going to dismiss the question.
@@johnluo2865 The Creator doesn't destroy his own design. Religion has degraded mankind's thinking that we are inadequate. The ideology is false.
@@johnluo2865 I would point out that a God that condemns his children to burn eternally as the Catholic and protestant churches hold would indeed be a cruel God, however, It is wholly unbiblical to claim that Hell is some form of eternal torment. That isn't a Biblical truth, it's a later development, Ecclisiastes 9:4-5 "There is hope for whoever Is among the living, because a live dog is better off than a dead lion. For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all, nor do they have any more reward, because all memory of them is forgotten." Further Romans 6:22 reads: "For the wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life by Christ Jesus our Lord." Gehhenna is death, eternal death, not eternal punishment. You can see more on the subject of hellfire and it's falsity here: www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&docid=502014162&srcid=share
And in video format here: www.jw.org/finder?srcid=share&wtlocale=E&lank=pub-ebtv_4_VIDEO
(The MORTAL COIL and The HUMAN SOUL)
"A journey to the truth"
This work will answer these questions with both sides. Secular and liturgical. If this is of interest to any of you please don't hesitate to respond.
Philosophy is truely spiritual 🤌🏻🤌🏻✨✨
You my translate this in different languages like kinyarwanda etc
3:50 this is funny, by this definition, computers have at least 4 souls. The electrical soul on top of physics, the logic soul on top of electronics, the binary/code soul on top of it, and on top of all, the software soul, the real soul Soul.
I'm talking about abstraction. Its funny to think at that time Mathematics was a step ahead of philosophy because of the Christian believes holding things back.
I do realize that I have a vision as posteriori because I was born after it
Mind /soul and body are one ☝️ substance and connection; Pineal gland, coherence with the mind & machines . magic mushrooms 🍄 are a good example of a gateway to the spiritual realm that can be led to a,non human form
Why does this have to smuggle in the ‘substantial soul’ concept of Christianity into an otherwise very good exposition / analysis discussion about the nature of the soul?
Huh?
I would like if you keep your opinions and thoughts out of the data your presenting.
However you define the favorite God of choice is always an argument from ignorance fallacy
it better to understand things than explaining it and wasting your time.
Contrast to existentialism which posits that there is no teleological design to anything :) Descartes worked for the Church, his conclusions seem more like propaganda to me.
they are each positing some sort of design that's a teleological synthesis with the church that is existentialism.... sartre, heidegger and kierkegaard.
I've aways seen the human as spirit, soul and body. Like a computer. The body would be all the hardware making up the human body like the screen the keyboard the mainframe the mouse and all the cords. Then the spirit would be the energy flowing through the computer through the cord from the wall socket animating and powering up the computer and giving it life or turning it on. Then the software the floppy disk that has all your personal information on it, the disk itself would be your brain but the writing on the disk the programing the things you have learned and experiences all the things that have been recorded your unique disposition and temperament anyway you've internalized your experiences all the things that make you, you, that is recorded on that floppy disk, that could also leave the computer into the cloud that would be your soul. it's just an analogy but that's how I see it.the energy powering the computer and the information on the disk which could be like your spirit and soul leave the body or computer after death and go back to God from which they came.and will be reunited with the body at the resurrection.
Only a connection to the power source gives the energy or “ spirit “ of a computer.
A machine has no free will , “ Spirit “ , only another’s will to plug the machine in to receive the electrical charge and no choice but to do the will of the operator of the machine.
Machines have no “ feelings “ which generate “ e “ motion”; significant differences.
Some common properties are only man’s image reflected in the inanimate objects.
Machines have no initiative.
You're a bit all over the place.
There’s not a shred of evidence for any of these assertions.
We wouldnt know until your dead thats the point of the after life
How can there be evidence for or against anything non physical? What evidence is presentable? What would you accept as evidence for such? Requiring physical evidence for non physical entity seems like requiring sample evidence for the existence of a far distant planet, denying the validity of it's effect on other bodies.
Bad video. You shouldnt say "thats wierd" and such. Just teach about Rene, not your thoughts on it.