PHI 200 : Modern Philosophy

Francisco Jung
Essay II
Write a four to six page essay, double spaced, on the following
question:
Explain one of Descartes arguments for the distinction between mind
and body in Meditation VI. Is the argument valid or invalid? In what
sense precisely is it valid or invalid?
Rene Descartes was the first to bring up the differentiation
between the mind and body, which led to many arguments regarding
the existence and attributes of both. In Descartes Meditation VI, he
argues that there is indeed a distinction between the mind and body
and that one can exist without the other respectively. However, his way
of proving the aforementioned argument is flawed thus giving birth to
many other philosophies of the mind and body.
Descartes defines what he believes is mind and body and
distinguishes each by first elaborating on imagination and conception.
Initially he sets up the difference between imagination and conception
by observing that, a special effort of mind is necessary to the act of
imagination, which is not required to conceiving or understanding (ad
intelligendum) for although I did not posses it, I should still remain
the same that I now am and this special exertion of mind clearly
shows the difference between imagination and pure intellection

(imagination et intellection pura) (page 161). He argues that

imagination is not necessary for conception and thus one is
independent and distinct from the other. This is established to make
his next point that, this mode of thinking differs from pure intellection
only in this respect, that the mind in conceiving turns in some way
upon itself, and considers some one of the ideas it possesses within
itself; but in imagining it turns towards the body, and contemplates in
it some object conformed to the idea which it either of itself conceived
or apprehended by sense (page 161). Descartes anchors the
imagination to the body by stating that since imagination requires the
senses to have an image of something and the senses are part of the
body, then imagination must be part of the body. Subsequently, he
anchors conception to the mind by explicating how senses or
imagination are not needed to know a definition of something but
information is acquired internally by thinking. Thus far Descartes is
valid in that the mind and body is different because they carry different
attributes that are independent from one another; namely conception
and imagination.
He further distinguishes mind vs body and conception vs
imagination by diving into the subject of dreams and memory. He
believes that sleep can not be distinguished, from the waking state:
for [there is] a very marked difference between the two states, in
respect that our memory can never connect our dreams with each

other and with the course of life, in the way it is in the habit of doing
with events that occur when we are awake (page 175). This is similar
to Carl Jungs theory of how he believes in the existence of the
unconscious and how dreams are a window to the minds unconscious.
Memories are dependent on the body whereas dreams are more
spiritual and independent from memories or the body. Thus there is
further distinction between the mind and body since the mind can
dream without the body and the body can remember without the mind.
Now with all this, Descartes proves that the mind exists and is different
from the body by likening the mind with conception and dreams
whereas he likens the body to imagination and memory.
The flaw of Descartes argument occurs when he tries to
distinguish mind and body as independent entities. At first he argues
that, it is sufficient that [he is] able clearly and distinctly to conceive
one thing apart from another, in order to be certain that the one is
different from the other, seeing they may at least be made to exist
separately [he] rightly [concludes] that [his] essence consists only in
[his] being a thinking thing [or a substance whose whole essence or
nature is merely thinking] (page 165). In other words, he states that
he is a thinking thing and he can not stop thinking because in trying to
do so he is already thinking about not thinking. Then he goes on to say
that, although [he] certainly [does] possess a body with which [he is]
very closely conjoined [he has] a clear and distinct idea of [himself], in

as far as [he is] only a thinking and unextended thing, and as, on the
other hand, [he possesses] a distinct idea of body, in as far as it is only
an extended and unthinking thing, it is certain that [his mind], is
entirely and truly distinct from [his] body, and may exist without it
(page 165). To simplify his argument, his proof of the mind being able
to exist without the body goes as follows :
1) If I can conceive clearly and distinctly x without y, then x is
different from y
2) I can clearly and distinctly conceive the mind without the body
3) The mind is distinct from the body and can exist without it
Descartes commits the fallacy of begging the question or arriving at a
conclusion from statements that themselves are questionable and
have to be proved but are assumed true. From the first two claims one
can only deduce that if x is the mind and y is the body that the mind is
different from the body but not that one can independently exist
without the other. Such is assuming that if you can conceive one thing
without the other than it can exist without the other. For example, if
you can conceive the brain without the body, it does not necessarily
mean that the brain can exist without the body since although they are
different the brain is a part of the whole body and thus can not exist
independently. He has setup up an elaborate system of distinctions
between conception and imagination as well as dreams and memories
and how they are all independent from one another but it does not
apply to the mind and body. Just because the attributes of the mind

and body are independent from one another does not mean that the
mind and body are independent as well.
He further commits the fallacy of inconsistency when he insists
that the body is an extension of the mind. He states that he is, not
lodged in [his body] as a pilot in a vessel, but that [he is] besides so
intimately conjoined, and as it were intermixed with it, that [his] mind
and body compose a certain unity for if this were not the case, [he]
should not feel pain when [his] body is hurt, seeing [he is] merely a
thinking thing, but should perceive the wound by the understanding
alone, just as a pilot perceives by sight when any part of his vessel is
damaged (page 167-8). This contradicts his claim earlier that the
mind is distinct/separate from the body and is independent from one
another. He seems to embrace both Aristotle and Platos view of the
soul or mind but they are innately incongruous. Aristotle believes that
there is a nutritive soul of growth, a perceptive soul of pain, pleasure
and desire, and a soul of reason, which all disintegrates when the body
is dead. Plato on the other hand believes that the soul is not
dependent on the body and is able to migrate to a new physical body.
Descartes seems to believe that there is a soul that experiences
growth, pain, pleasure, desire and reason but does not disintegrate
when the body perishes because the soul is independent of the body.
This is illogical because experiences of growth, pain, pleasure, desire
and reason are innate to the body and Descartes stated earlier himself

that the mind and body carry different attributes that are independent
from one another like conception and imagination. If he was to say that
such experiences are the only strings that attach the soul to the body
and that if the body were to die then the strings would be detached he
would be committing the fallacy of limited (or false) alternatives. He
has neither proved nor disproved Platos or Aristotles claim to mind
and body but is instead suggesting a mix of the two with no evidence.
Although Descartes has fallen to several fallacies he has
successfully proven the distinction in categories of mind and body and
thus did not commit the fallacy of reduction. One can not say that the
mind is nothing but a part of the body or that the body is nothing but a
part of the mind. His claim of mind-body dualism thoroughly proves
that one is not reduced to the other in any way. It could be said that he
is the founding father of property dualism, which claims that there may
not be a distinction in substance, but that mental and physical
properties are still categorically distinct, and not reducible to each
other. In fact, it could be said that he gave birth to substance dualism,
idealism, neutral monism, and physicalism that are all different claims
of mind and body. Without such controversy it would be hard to say
that Descartes was successful in proving the distinction of the mind
and body.
Works Cited

Descartes, Rene. The Rationalists: Descartes: Discourse on Method &

Meditations.
Garden City, N.Y. : Dolphin Books, 1960. Print.