Introduction
The mind is perhaps the most important enigma in human knowledge. The mind is exceptionally different from other bodily matter that in the breadth of our history, many believed that the mind is not a bodily matter at all (Beakley & Udlow, 1992).
The paper supports the position of dualism. It is an attempt to address the issue of the mind. In order to give conclusion, the paper cultivates the philosophical position of dualism. It talks about mind and body problems and gives statements that oppose and supports the position. The soundness and legitimacy of the dualism argument relies on the reality or falsity of the existence of immaterial objects.
Mind and Body Problem
The problem regarding the concept of the mind and body entails the separation or distinction of the mind from the body. This idea of separation inquires if the mind can exist independently without the body and thus, supposes that the mind is an immaterial object.
Dualism is a philosophical principle that believes about the existence of the immaterial reality. There are two kinds of dualism; the substance dualism and the property dualism. Substance dualism supports the belief that the mind is an immaterial matter that can exist independently from the body. Property dualism supports the idea that there are immaterial realities connected with brain activities (Beakley & Udlow, 1992).
Before we move on discussing dualism, let us picture the idea that opposes it, the concept of materialism. It tells us that all reality is material in nature; and thus, there is no immaterial reality. The idea of materialism supports that the immaterial soul, reason, consciousness and spirit do not exist; the spiritual or psychic activities have material explanations; and the mind is nothing more than the human brain (Beakley & Udlow, 1992).
Basically, the mind and body problem rest upon the legitimacy or falsity of the mind, while being part of a material body, is an immaterial object.
Argument
Having stated that there exist a distinction between the mind/soul and the body, we now inquire about the characteristic of such feature. Socrates’ theory of knowledge implies that knowledge originates from the brain, which is rational. Knowledge does not originate from the senses, which are deceivable. Moreover, Socrates supposed that the mind has a strong division which is controlled by emotions and this is subjected to the body. When mind and body collaborated, the mind is limited by what humans are capable to identify with the senses.
With the abovementioned argument, we present that knowledge comes from the rational part of the mind and is immaterial; while the senses that limits the human mind is influenced by the body that is material.
It is true that human beings have bodies, that they live in a material world and that their mind gains knowledge about the material world by means of senses. The senses permit them to attain knowledge about people living in time and space (Shear, 1992).
Let us discuss further the components of the mind. Perceptions are formed by motivations or the intelligence. The mind, using reason or intellect, forms concepts by which it captures the natures of things. Intellect is not similar to imagination. Imagination is image opinion. Imagination always engrosses picturing persons in conditions of individuality based on senses (Hamlyn, 1996). However, there is an epistemological variation among reason and intellect, imagination, and the variety of senses. They are diverse cognitive capabilities.
According to Plato, knowledge is cognition that is true and can by no means be misguided while principle is cognition that can either be true or false. We cannot obtain knowledge of the reality by means of the senses. By using our senses, we repeatedly create errors about things to recognize them. The components of the senses are frequently subjected to change. Thus, we cannot obtain knowledge base from senses. In the condition that knowledge is always true then the components of knowledge must be unchanging. No physical substance resembles this, just immaterial things (Swinburne, 1986).
The material perceived by the senses subsists in time and space. However, the nature of things is not of this kind. For instance, individual person transforms over a lifetime while the nature of human beings does not. Human beings possess similar nature regardless of the time of their existence. Established philosophers believed that the nature of things is monotonous or unchanging. In a few occasions, the natures of things have a dissimilar type of realism, an immaterial actuality from material things (Hamlyn, 1996).
In summary, although human beings live in a material world and that their mind gains knowledge, it does not necessarily mean that knowledge is a material thing. Knowledge is always true and its component must be unchanging, same as the nature of things. Human nature and knowledge, being always true and unchanging, can be asserted as immaterial things.
Conclusion
Mind and body are both correlative philosophy of human beings. The existence of the immaterial reality that supports the dualism philosophy still needs more evidences. Although we cited knowledge and human nature as immaterial things, we still cannot prove the existence of immaterial reality beyond death. With death, we go back to the argument that the mind cannot exist without the body. The dependence of mind and body opposes the dualism philosophy. When a person dies, the body does not possess life any longer, and the mind also ends to exist (Edward, 1992). This principle of materialism is less controversial and easier to understand. Naturally, we know that human beings exist in a material world and therefore, our minds acquire knowledge of material things through our senses.
Nevertheless, we cannot fully accept the philosophy of materialism yet, and deny the entire dualism concept. What we are saying is that the dualists’ arguments against materialism are not yet complete and do not possess enough persuasive power. The arguments of dualism still need further significant confirmations.
References:
Beakley, B., Udlow, P. (1992). The Philosophy of Mind: Classical Problem Contemporary. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Edwards, P. (1992). Immortality. New York: Mcmillan.
Hamlyn, D. W. (1996). Aristotle. "Soul and Body, Form and Matter. Oxford: Blackwell.
Shear, J. (1992). Explaining Consciousness: The Hard Problem. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Swinburne, R. (1986). The Evolution of The Soul. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
