Substance dualism is too extreme to be convincing; dualism and materialism are much stronger arguments. Substance dualism is the belief that the body and soul are completely separate entities, which can exist without each other. Plato and Descartes were two key philosophers that supported this idea, however philosophers such as Aristotle and Elizabeth Anscombe believed in a less extreme dualism, in which the body and soul are separate but require each other to complete their purpose. Conversely, Richard Dawkins opposes dualism completely and relies on a materialistic view to explain his idea of a ‘soul’- he rejects the traditional concept and instead acknowledges any idea of the soul to be merely human emotion.
Plato’s substance dualism relates …show more content…
He first realised that it is possible to doubt the existence of everything, including the body. However, it is impossible to doubt the concept of “I” as a thought. “Cogito, ergo sum,” translated from Latin to mean “I think, therefore I am” is the phrase that brings together this idea. To summarise briefly, the existence of everything is not entirely assured, but there must be something that exists that is able to think this- which is what Descartes believed to be the mind or soul, Therefore, something exists other than the body, creating a division between the body and soul. Cogito ergo sum, in Descartes’ view, is the only piece of knowledge which is so certain it cannot be doubted. He considered the mind to be mental and spiritual, while the body is physical and not …show more content…
In her text Human Life, Action and Ethics she considers the human ability to point. A disembodied soul would not be able to point as there is no physical substance, but without a soul the body would have no reason or purpose to point. The soul explains the action, and this explanation cannot be gathered from the physical gesture alone. This argument is very convincing because as a pose to the soul controlling the body as with substance dualism, the body and soul work together to complete a goal. This is a logical explanation backed up with an understandable example, and is a better approach than substance
Plato’s substance dualism relates …show more content…
He first realised that it is possible to doubt the existence of everything, including the body. However, it is impossible to doubt the concept of “I” as a thought. “Cogito, ergo sum,” translated from Latin to mean “I think, therefore I am” is the phrase that brings together this idea. To summarise briefly, the existence of everything is not entirely assured, but there must be something that exists that is able to think this- which is what Descartes believed to be the mind or soul, Therefore, something exists other than the body, creating a division between the body and soul. Cogito ergo sum, in Descartes’ view, is the only piece of knowledge which is so certain it cannot be doubted. He considered the mind to be mental and spiritual, while the body is physical and not …show more content…
In her text Human Life, Action and Ethics she considers the human ability to point. A disembodied soul would not be able to point as there is no physical substance, but without a soul the body would have no reason or purpose to point. The soul explains the action, and this explanation cannot be gathered from the physical gesture alone. This argument is very convincing because as a pose to the soul controlling the body as with substance dualism, the body and soul work together to complete a goal. This is a logical explanation backed up with an understandable example, and is a better approach than substance