Finite Subjects in the Ethics

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ursula Renz
Keyword(s):  
Body Problem ◽  
Thomas Aquinas ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
The Body ◽  
Mind And Body ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
New Interpretation ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Finite Minds

This chapter suggests a new interpretation of Spinoza’s concept of mind claiming that the goal of the equation of the human mind with the idea of the body is not to solve the mind-body problem, but rather to show how we can, within the framework of Spinoza’s rationalism, conceive of finite minds as irreducibly distinguishable individuals. To support this view, the chapter discusses the passage from E2p11 to E2p13 against the background of three preliminaries, i.e. the notion of a union between mind and body as it appears in Thomas Aquinas’ refutation of Averroism, Spinoza’s views on knowledge of actually existing things in E2p8c, and the phenomenological character of E2a2-4. It argues that while this view on the human mind does not undermine radical rationalism, it does require its amendment by some irreducibly empirical concessions.

Neurophenomenology and the Spontaneity of Consciousness

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 133-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Hanna ◽  
Evan Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Body Problem ◽  
Spatiotemporal Pattern ◽  
Mind And Body ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
Dynamic Patterns ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Mind ◽  
The Brain

Consciousness is what makes the mind-body problem really intractable (Nagel1980, p. 150). My reading of the situation is that our inability to come up with an intelligible conception of the relation between mind and body is a sign of the inadequacy of our present concepts, and that some development is needed (Nagel1998, p. 338). Mind itself is a spatiotemporal pattern that molds the metastable dynamic patterns of the brain (Kelso 1995, p. 288).

Functionalism, Sensations, and Materialism

1977 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-274
Author(s):  
Larry J. Eshelman
Keyword(s):  
Body Problem ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Adequate Account ◽  
Mind And Body ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Functionalist Approach

I wish to defend a functionalist approach to the mind-body problem. I use the word ‘functionalist’ with some reluctance, however; for although it has become the conventional label for the sort of approach taken by such philosophers as H. Putnam and D. C. Dennett, I believe it is somewhat misleading. The functionalist, as I understand him, tries to show how there can be machine analogues of mental states and then argues that just as we are not inclined to postulate an ontological dualism between simulated mental states and the machine's physical states, we need not postulate a dualism between mind and body. The functionalist also argues, however, that it is wrong to identify the mental states or simulated mental states with the physical states.Recently functionalism has come under attack, first for not being a coherent alternative, and secondly for not being able to provide an adequate account of sensations. I believe that the first objection is misguided and shall deal with it in section I. However, I agree that functionalists have not provided an adequate account of sensations, but I shall try to help remedy this in section II.

scholarly journals Placebo: Feeling Better, Getting Better, and the Problems of Mind and Body

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
John F. Kihlstrom
Keyword(s):  
Medical Practice ◽  
Body Problem ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Placebo Effects ◽  
Physical Conditions ◽  
Mind And Body ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
The Mind

Over its history, medicine has vacillated between acknowledging placebo effects as important and trying to overcome them. Placebos are controversial, in part, because they appear to challenge a biocentric view of the scientific basis of medical practice. At the very least, research should distinguish between the effects of placebos on subjective and objective endpoints. Theoretically, placebos are of interest because they underscore the other side of the mind-body problem: how mental states can affect physical conditions.

Mind and Body

1988 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 69-83
Author(s):  
K. V. Wilkes
Keyword(s):  
Body Problem ◽  
Mind And Body ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Canonical Status

I expect every reader knows the hackneyed old joke: ‘What is matter? Never mind. What is mind? No matter.’ Antique as this joke is, it none the less points to an interesting question. For the so-called mind–body dichotomy, which has been raised to almost canonical status in post-Cartesian philosophy, is not in fact at all easy to draw or to defend. This of course means that ‘the mind–body problem’ is difficult both to describe and to solve—or rather, as I would prefer, to dissolve.

scholarly journals Angel in “the Cartesian theatre” – Aquinas and the mind-body problem

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 66-79
Author(s):  
Tomasz Stępień
Keyword(s):  
Human Body ◽  
Body Problem ◽  
Human Action ◽  
The Body ◽  
Explanatory Gap ◽  
Philosophical Discussion ◽  
Body And Soul ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
The Mind ◽  
The Explanatory Gap

One of the solutions of the mind-body problem, which returns to the philosophical discussion on consciousness is the “soul hyphotesis”. Existence of the soul can clear the “explanatory gap”, but it brings yet another problems in explanation of how consciousness works. The magiority of those issues exist because of very specific understanding of the mind-body relations in Cartesian way as two separated substances. Some of the schoars propose to overlap the Cartesian approach by returning to the philosophy of St Thomas Aquinas. This article shows that in the writings of Aquinas we can find exact analogy of the Cartesian view of the body-soul relations in the description of how immaterial angel assums the body. For Aquinas angel exist and acts in assumed human body in the very same way as Descartes describes the soul acting in human body, and angel’s mode of perception is similar to what is usually called as “the Cartesian theatre”. For Aquinas angel in assumed body cannot perfom any human action, it only pretends to perform it, because it operates bodily organs as the form, which is not united with this specific body. St Thomas explanation of the relation of body and soul in human being relies on the claim of unity of body and soul, which together are one substance. Such approach was even called biological, because of the stress on the role which body plays in human actions. Therefore Aquinas proposition could be perceived the way of overcoming the dualism and removing some of the dilemas which are linked with “soul hypothesis” understood in traditional way.

scholarly journals CONTRIBUCIONES DE LA FENOMENOLOGÍA DE EDITH STEIN AL PROBLEMA MENTE-CUERPO: APUNTES PARA LA PSICOLOGÍA

2021 ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Tommy Akira Goto
Keyword(s):  
Body Problem ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Ontological Status ◽  
Edith Stein ◽  
Mind And Body ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
The Mind

La psicología es una rama científica relativamente nueva y a la que todavía le faltan bases metodológicas consistentes para fundamentar sus investigaciones. Dada su inmadurez, tal ciencia tiene dificultades para delimitar su estatuto ontológico, lo que genera diversos equívocos epistemológicos y metodológicos. Así, se impone una cuestión fundamental para la aclaración del objeto de la psicología: el problema mente-cuerpo. En ese sentido, el objetivo de este artículo, basado en la fenomenología de Edith Stein, es analizar algunos trabajos de la filósofa, a saber: “Causalidad Psíquica” e “Introducción a la Filosofía”. De esa manera, a través de las investigaciones de Stein acerca de la psique (que puede situarse en la cercanía de lo que se entiende por mente en el ámbito de las ciencias de la mente) y del cuerpo, se concluye que es posible concebir la cuestión psique/mente-cuerpo como una unidad-dual que se instancia en el Leib.Psychology is a relatively new scientific branch that still lacks consistent methodological foundations to support their investigations. Given their immaturity, that science still faces difficulties to delimit its ontological status, which raises various epistemological and methodological misconceptions. Thus, there is a fundamental question for an elucidation of the object of Psychology: the mindbody problem. The proposal of this article, in this sense, is to discuss the mind-body problem in the light of the Phenomenology of Edith Stein, seeking from there lay the fundation of Psychology. For this, some works of the philosopher was analysed, namely: “Psychic Causality” and “Introduction to Philosophy”. In this way, through the investigations of Stein about the psyche (which can be approximated to what is meant by mind in the context of the Sciences of the mind) and body, concluded that it is possible to conceive the psyche/mind-body issue while a dual-unit that instantiates in the Leib.

scholarly journals THE MIND-BODY PROBLEM(S) IN DESCARTES’ “MEDITATIONS” AND HUSSERL’S “CRISIS” (Part 2)

2020 ◽  
Vol - (5) ◽  
pp. 117-128
Author(s):  
Andrii Leonov
Keyword(s):  
Body Problem ◽  
Transcendental Phenomenology ◽  
Natural Sciences ◽  
The Other ◽  
Husserlian Phenomenology ◽  
Conceptual Level ◽  
Mind And Body ◽  
Magnum Opus ◽  
Mind Body Problem ◽  
The Mind

The main topic of this paper is the mind-body problem. The author analyzes it in the context of Husserlian phenomenology. The key texts for the analysis and interpretation are Descartes’ magnum opus “Meditations on the First Philosophy” and Husserl’ last work “The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology”. The author claims that already in Descartes’ text instead of one mind-body problem, one can find two: the ontological mind-body problem (mind-brain relation) and conceptual one (“mind” and “body” as concepts). In Descartes’ “Meditations”, the ontological level is explicit, while the conceptual level is implicit. In Husserl’s “Crisis”, on the other hand, the situation is different: the conceptual level of the problem (as the opposition between transcendental phenomenology and natural sciences) is explicit, while the ontological level is implicit. Nevertheless, it seems that Husserl has answers to both the “traditional” as well as the “conceptual” mind-body problems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document